Fietkau 1

Angela Fietkau
Professor M. Bowlby
HIS 410 California History
29 August 2010
Democracy was denied by the Internment of Japanese

The United States was founded with the intent to create a country of

freedom and democracy. However, throughout its history, people of the

United States who were not Anglo Saxton protestant males, have not shared

the same experience. The United States, as a relatively young country, has

had to grow and learn from its past mistakes in order to improve. One

example of a mistake made by the United States occurred in 1942 after the

bombing of Pearl Harbor. This attack would plunge the United States into

WWII, a fight for democracy that when won, would instill democracy in

Europe. However, while the United States fought for democracy overseas, it

was actually denied to a specific group of its own people. After the bombing

of Pearl Harbor, a hysteria of fear and prejudice resulted in the internment of

Japanese American citizens along with Japanese immigrants, with no

reasonable evidence that they posed any threat. In order to understand how

this came about it is important to look at the history of the Japanese and

United States relationship as well as the context of the time when the

internment camps were initiated.

California has always been an integral part to Japanese immigration.

The first Japanese immigrants came to California in 1869 and by 1890, half of

the total population of Japanese immigrants, 2,038, had made California their

home (Bowlby, Unit 2, Mod. 2:Lecture B, Slide 2). One social dynamic that

may have lead up to the impending racism directed at the Japanese, was the
 Fietkau 2

tension and resentment towards the Chinese immigrants who looked similar

to them. California’s Chinese population in California was nearly 63,000 in

1870, and resentment grew at their numbers (Bowlby Unit 1, Module

4:Lecture B, Slide 24). Groups like The Workingmen’s Party, spread hateful

propaganda about all Chinese immigrants and held them responsible for the

depression at that time. The propaganda that was spread by these groups

influenced a ban on all Chinese immigration through the Exclusion act of

1882. This act banned Chinese immigration for 10 years and would be

continually renewed until 1902 (Starr 121, 178). The Japanese immigrants

were welcomed after the Exclusion Acts as alternative workers to the

Chinese. However, the United States was not prepared for them to stay and

cut out a life for themselves as all other immigrants had.

One historical circumstance that may have lead up to the eventual

internment of Japanese Americans was the emergence of the Asiatic

Exclusion League (AEL) at the dawn of the twentieth century. The AEL was

based in San Francisco and comprised of powerful leaders in labor unions

and politics. Their main objective was to keep California white by preventing

an “impending” flood of Asian immigrants. They did this through spreading

their message of intolerance through rallies and lobbying congress to extend

the Chinese Exclusion Act to Japanese and Korean immigrants (Asiatic Coolie

Invasion). Succumbing to pressure from the AEL, the San Francisco Board of

Education decided to extend their segregation of Chinese students to include

Japanese and Korean students as well. The Chinese had been segregated
 Fietkau 3

since the Oriental School was established in 1884 (The History of Japanese

Immigration, Discrimination, Par 1). Once this happened, the Japanese

government protested immediately at the breach of rights directed at their

citizens and the United States parleyed with them in fear of starting a war.

The strained relationship between the United States and Japan may be

another piece of the puzzle that allowed the eventual internment. Japan had

proved itself as a formidable country when it went to war with Russia in 1904

and defeated them in 1905. In fact, within the last half of the 19th century,

Japan grew considerably by developing an efficient bureaucracy, building up

their Navy, defeating China in two wars, and competing with European

countries for trade (Robinson, Chapter 1, Par. 1). This growth and rise to

power changed the United State’s view of Japan since they began contact

through a trade treaty in 1854 (Commodore, Par. 1). After Japan’s rise to

power, the United States began to see their imperialism as a potential threat

(Robinson, Chapter 1, Par. 3). In an effort to appease both sides President

Theodore Roosevelt negotiated a compromise with Japan called “The

Gentlemen’s Agreement.” In accordance to the “Agreement”, the school

board would bring the Japanese students back into the regular school system

and the United States would keep immigration open to wives and children of

existing Japanese immigrants. However, they would not permit Japanese

laborers to come to the West Coast entering from Hawaii. In response, Japan

volunteered to stop issuing exit visas to laborers heading to the United

States (Robinson, Chapter 1, Par. 24). Luckily for the predominantly male
 Fietkau 4

population of American Japanese immigrants or issei, due to the

“Agreement” wives and children of existing laborers were now able to

emigrate (Bowlby Unit 2, Module 2:Lecture B, Slide 3). Not only that, but up

to 30,000 “picture brides” immigrated to the United States to consummate

arranged marriages set up in Japan (Starr 225). This allowed the majority of

issei to settle down and start a family. Kevin Starr writes that “these women

created a baby boom of American-born citizens nisei, who grew up fully

American in the 1920’s and 1930’s” (225). Although the intent of the

compromise was to limit Japanese immigration, the population grew and with

it the racial tendencies towards them.

During the time of the “Gentlemen’s Agreement”, the Japanese

immigrants currently living within the United States began to improve their

situations. No longer satisfied with simple agricultural labor, the Japanese

took their earnings and became farmers themselves. Farm land controlled

by Japanese immigrants within California increased from 4,698 acres in

1900, to 99,254 acres in only ten years (Ferguson 7). Unfortunately, anti-

Asian sentiment would only get worse with the increased success of the

Japanese. The historian Kevin Starr writes that it was “racism based on

envy” (225). This envy would manifest itself as laws directed at limiting the

freedoms of Japanese immigrants. One such law was the Alien Land Act of

1913. This act prevented aliens ineligible for citizenship from owning

agricultural land. The play on words here prevented the act from affecting

white immigrants who had political support (Ferguson 6-7). This act would
 Fietkau 5

be the predecessor for more laws directed at discriminating the Japanese to

come.

The Immigration Act of 1924 would ban all Japanese immigration until

1952 (Bowlby Unit 2, Module 2: Lecture B, Slide 6). In response to the

growing Japanese population despite the measures taken against them, a

report was drawn up outlining figures of Japanese non-citizen and citizen

population and their occupations. The governor of California used this report

as proof that more legislation regarding the Japanese was needed. Scare

tactics fueled by the report findings (i.e. Japanese birth rate would make

them the future majority and the Americanization of Japanese was

impossible for both immigrants and their children because of their nature)

ensured that the act passed the vote (Ferguson 10). The Immigration Act of

1924 would ban all Japanese immigration until 1952 (Bowlby Unit 2, Module

2: Lecture B, Slide 6).

The final nail in the coffin that set the Japanese internment camps in

motion was the attack of Pearl Harbor. On the morning of December 7th,

1941, Japan issued a sneak attack against the Pacific Naval stronghold of

Pearl Harbor. The entire Pacific Naval Fleet was gathered in Pearl Harbor in

order to protect the West Coast from an anticipated Japanese naval assault.

Not thinking of the possibility of an air strike gave Japan the element of

surprise, and the ability to employ leathal damage to the entire Pacific Fleet

(Robinson, Chapter 3, Par. 1). The hours and days that followed left the

United States and especially the West Coast in a state of shock and panic.
 Fietkau 6

That day FBI agents began rounding up any Japanese immigrants suspected

of working with the enemy. Houses were ransacked for anything that could

be used in connection with signaling planes or that indicated loyalty to Japan.

Within two days following the attack up to five hundred suspected Japanese

immigrants were incarcerated by the FBI. California, Oregon and

Washington believed they could also be attacked by Japan. Leaders of these

states lobbied for the immediate expulsion of Japanese in their territories,

suspecting that the nature of anyone with Japanese ancestry would lead

them to help Japan in the event of an attack (Japanese-American Par. 1). On

February 19, 1942, President Franklin D. Roosevelt signed executive order

9006, allowing the War Department to remove anyone who may be

dangerous from military areas (Starr 225-226). This gave the military

authority to remove Japanese non-citizens and Japanese American citizens

within the West Coast or Southern Arizona and transport them into hastily

set up holding centers (Executive Order Par. 1). Within five months, more

than 110,000 Japanese non-citizens and American citizens would be moved

again, this time to the Japanese internment camps (Starr 227).

The attack on Pearl Harbor catapulted the United States into WWII.

Our country maintained that they were fighting a war in preservation of

democracy in Europe. However, this was a violation of the civil rights of

Japanese American citizens. There were isolated cases of people fighting to

prove this at the time. Korematsu v. United States is an example of a

Japanese American citizen that challenged the legality of the internment

 Fietkau 7

camps. Fred T. Korematsu was arrested by the FBI for refusing to go to the

internment camp. He fought against it through the legal system and his

case was brought to the Supreme Court. Unfortunately, the vote was six to

three and the Supreme Court decided to uphold his federal conviction for

failing to report for relocation. However, the legal case did bring the

argument of the internment camps as unconstitutional to light (Korematsu v.

United States Par. 1). Justice Murphy was one of three Supreme Court

justices who agreed with Korematsu. An excerpt from his argument against

executive order 9006 is as follows:

Being an obvious racial discrimination, the order deprives all

those within its scope of the equal protection of the laws

guaranteed by the Fifth Amendment. It further deprives these

individuals of their constitutional rights to live and work where

they will, to establish a home where they choose and to move

about freely. In excommunicating them without benefit of

hearings, this order also deprives them of all their constitutional

rights to procedural due process. Yet no reasonable relation to

an “immediate, imminent, and impending” public danger is

evident to support this racial restriction which is one of the most

sweeping and complete deprivations of constitutional rights in

the history of this nation in the absence of martial law

(Korematsu v. United States).

 Fietkau 8

Through his argument, we can see how the internment camps were

unconstitutional. Those that voted to uphold the conviction used the war as

an excuse for the necessity to intern so many American citizens. It was a

poor argument which leads one to believe racism was a factor.

In the summer of 1942, the civilian War Relocation Authority built ten

“instant cities” in isolated inland areas to house and contain the Japanese

Americans and resident aliens (Home Away from Home, Par 1). Only able

to bring what they could carry, Japanese American children and adults

boarded trains and busses headed to their assigned camps. They faced this

separation bravely, believing that leaving with cooperation showed their

patriotism for the United States. Louise Ogawa, a sixteen year old nisei

internee wrote “If American soldiers can endure hardships so can

we!”(Leaving Home Par. 5). Of course, these people had no idea what

conditions were like in these camps, what they would do there or how long

they would stay. When they arrived at their destination, many of the

Japanese were shocked at what they saw. Jeanne Houston (19), co-author of

the autobiographical novel Fairwell to Manzanar, writes of her experience

riding in the bus as it came to its destination. “We drove past a barbed-wire

fence… inside the bus no one stirred. No one waved or spoke. They just

stared out the windows, ominously silent.” Their hopes of fair treatment as

American citizens were dashed as they looked out at what would be their

home for at least the next three years (Starr 227).

 Fietkau 9

The internment camps which housed American citizens were

completely surrounded by barbwire fence and armed guards. The housing

consisted of tarpapered pine barracks divided into six single rooms. The

single rooms at Manzanar were sixteen by twenty feet and contained a stove

for heat and a single light bulb to see by. Whole families were the lucky ones

who lived in these crowded rooms with no privacy. Some couples were

forced to live with up to six strangers (Houston 21). Besides being crowded,

these rooms offered little protection from the elements. The pine board

walls that made up the barracks were of poor quality and had holes and

cracks. The people who lived there were forced to use old tin can lids and

scrap lumber from around the camp to improve conditions (Houston 24-26).

These rooms were used for sleeping only and everything else was done

outside in other units. Each block of barracks had a communal dining hall,

recreational hall, showers and open bathrooms (Home Away From Home,

Par. 2). Even though families were cramped in sleeping courters at night,

this setup actually drove many families away from each other. Communal

spaces such as the mess halls were full of different people and friends sat

together and chatted about their day. Different members of the family

would eat in different mess halls where it was rumored to have better food.

Therefore there was no space set aside for the family to congregate together

and relationships suffered because of it (Houston 36-37). Jeanne Houston

(37) writes of her personal experience with this: “My own family, after three

years of mess hall living, collapsed as an integrated unite.” Unlike the

 Fietkau 10

economical hardships suffered as a result of internment, this could never be

compensated.

Women’s experiences in the internment camps differed from that of

men. Their place was to keep the peace and support their families in any

way that they could. It was common for women to sacrifice their own desires

for those of their family or community. Cooperation and working together

was very important (Houston 33). Many women and men offered their

services when work around the camp was offered. Work wasn’t mandatory,

but many did it to pass the time and improve their community (Houston 39).

Some women even hosted classes in the arts (108). In short, they tried to

make the most of the bad situation they were placed in. One aspect of living

in the internment camps that women had trouble with were the bathrooms

and showers. Most of the women, with a background of modest Japanese

culture, found the open toilets and showers especially distressing. Women

endured this humiliation along with the communal living in the barracks for

the good of the community (Houston 33).

The men endured a different humiliation, one of powerlessness. They

could not provide for their families, or prevent the hardship that was placed

on them (Houston 72). One man vented his anger in a 1943 interview:

I have never been to Japan. We would have done anything to

show our loyalty. All we wanted to do was to be left alone on the

[West Coast]…My wife and I lost $10,000 in that evacuation. She

had a beauty parlor and had to give that up. I had a good
 Fietkau 11

position worked up as a gardener, and was taken away from

that. We had a little home and that’s gone now…” (Evacuation

Was a Mistake Par 3).

On the anniversary of the Pearl Harbor attack, a riot broke out in Manzanar.

Men were filled with bitterness and rage at the position they were put in.

The trigger was a man who was arrested and sent to county jail. He was

trying to organize a Kitchen Workers’ Union and was well known for “his

defiance and contempt for the authorities” (Houston 73). Before his arrest,

he had accused the camp’s white chief steward with stealing sugar and meat

from the camp warehouses. Most of the people in camp believe the

administration had arrested this man in order to cover up the stealing and it

enflamed the riot (Houston 74). One man who played a large part in the riot

was Hawaiian-born Joe Karihara, a war veteran who was “so frustrated by his

treatment at Manzanar he was ready to renounce his citizenship and sail to

the old country” (Houston 75). The mob was eventually dispersed by

military police and the riot was over with ten injured and two dead (Houston

76). The frustration and betrayal these men felt during the riot would not

change anything.

Some men felt pressured into enlisting in the army despite their own

fear of war or resentment to the government. The application for Leave

Clearance issued in 1943, also known as “the governments Loyalty Oath”,

was required of everyone age seventeen and over (Houston 82). The two

questions in the “Loyalty Oath” were:

 Fietkau 12

27. Are you willing to serve in the Armed Forces of the United

States on combat duty, wherever ordered?

28. Will you swear unqualified allegiance to the United States of

America and faithfully defend the United States from any or all

attack by foreign or domestic forces, and forswear any form of

allegiance or obedience to the Japanese emperor, or any other

foreign government, power or organization (Houston 81)?

Answering “yes” to questions 27 and 28 could result in an enlistment in the

army while answering “no” could send them to the high security camp in

Tule Lake as a traitor (Hane 573). Mikiso Hane, talks about his personal

experience as a young man forced to answer these questions in his article

Wartime Internment.

After I said yes to questions 27 and 28, the sergeant who had

processed my answer then asked me if I was willing to volunteer

for the Japanese-American combat unit… If I said no to his

question then logically he could conclude that I was lying when I

said yes to questions 27 and 28... If I did not volunteer, it was

possible, I thought, that I would be included among those who

answered no to questions 27 and 28 and be sent off to a camp

set up for disloyal Nisei and eventually be sent back to Japan…So

I said yes and signed on the dotted line (573).

Out of the Seventy-Five thousand who filled out the “Loyalty Oath” Sixty-Five

thousand confirmed their loyalty and willingness to serve (Hane 573).

 Fietkau 13

Despite their circumstances, these men believed that the best way to show

the United States who they were was to show them on the battlefield.

Jeanne Houston (85) notes “The all-Nisei 442nd Regimental Combat Team

was the most decorated American unit in World War II; it also suffered the

highest percentage of casualties and deaths.” These brave men provided

“visible proof” for the American government and public that the Japanese

Americans and immigrants were dedicated to the United States. Their

sacrifice should not have been needed, and demonstrates yet another way

American democracy failed the Japanese Americans during this period.

In spring of 1945, restrictions were lifted on the West Coast and

internees were finally able to go back to their homes. However, most did not

jump at the chance of leaving (The Slow Return Par. 4). Being isolated for

the past three years had caused most internees to lose everything and the

thought of having to start all over again was daunting. Not only that, but

fear of the people on the outside kept many internees in (Houston 127).

Jeanne Houston (128) expresses the apprehension her family felt that kept

them from leaving Manzanar: “at least we knew where we stood with our

neighbors [and] could live more or less at ease with them.” This fear of

returning to the West Coast was not unfounded. There were plenty of

incidents of “arson, vandalism, and violence against Japanese Americans

who returned to the West Coast” (The Slow Return Par. 6). Mikiso Hane

(575) spoke of his brother’s experience when he tried to go back home to

Hollister California after the internment.

 Fietkau 14

… he saw nothing but signs that said “No Japs Allowed.” He had

to find a place to eat, so he finally entered a small diner, hoping

that, it being a simple place, he would be allowed to have a hot

dog. The owner pulled out a shotgun and threatened to shoot

him if he didn’t get the hell out of there. That was the end of his

attempt to return to Hollister.

Japanese Families would never be the same. Younger generations of

families moved to the East Coast where “so few people of Asian

ancestry had settled…it was like heading for a neutral country”

(Houston 131). Despite these hardships, all camps were closed in

December of 1945 and life went on for Japanese Americans of the first

and second generation.

The Japanese American internment suggests that in 1942, the

nature of American democracy was relative to the racial prejudices of

the time. The excuse was that we were at war with Japan and the

United States couldn’t decipher between the un-loyal and loyal.

However, if this was true then why were Italian and German

immigrants treated differently as historian Greg Robinson reveals: “…

unlike Japanese Americans, whether aliens or citizens, enemy aliens

from other groups were granted speedy loyalty hearings at which the

accused were allowed to present witnesses and evidence to

demonstrate their loyalty” (Section One Par 13). Democracy was

denied to Japanese citizens through discrimination of ownership of land

 Fietkau 15

and denial of naturalization. Thankfully, the United States would

repeal the Alien Land Law in 1948 and in 1952 grant Japanese aliens

the ability to become citizens of the United States through the

Immigration and Naturalization Act (Sakamoto 101). Much later, in

1983, the Commission on Wartime Relocation and Internment of

Civilians would find that Executive Order 9066 and the internment of

Japanese American citizens and non-citizens stemmed from “race

prejudice, war hysteria, and a failure of political leadership.” A few

years later in 1988, a national apology was issued and the Civil

Liberties Act granted $20,000 to surviving internees (The Slow Return

Par. 8). This act would help to give closure to the living survivors,

their children and grandchildren. It also gives some hope that the

separation of a people based on their race will never happen again.

Then again, the current controversy over Mexican illegal immigrants

argues otherwise.

Works Cited

Asiatic Coolie Invasion. Virtual Museum of San Francisco. Accessed August

22, 2010. <http://www.sfmuseum.net/1906.2/invasion.html>.

Commodore Perry and the Opening of Japan. U.S. Navy Museum. Accessed
August 22, 2010
<http://www.history.navy.mil/branches/teach/ends/opening.htm >.
 Fietkau 16

“Evacuation Was a Mistake”: Anger at Being Interned. History Matters. The

U.S. Survey Course on the Web. Accessed August 24, 2010.<
http://historymatters.gmu.edu/d/5152>.

Executive Order 9066: The President Authorizes Japanese Relocation. History

Matters. The U.S. Survey Course on the Web. Accessed August 24,
2010.< http://historymatters.gmu.edu/d/5154>.

Ferguson, Edwin E. "The California Alien Land Law and the Fourteenth
Amendment." California Law Review 35.1 (1947): 61. Academic Search
Premier. EBSCO. Web. 23 Aug. 2010.

Hane, Mikiso. "Wartime Internment." Journal of American History 77.2 (1990):

569-575. Education Research Complete. EBSCO. Web. 15 Aug. 2010.

Home Away From Home. Smithsonian Education. Accessed August 26, 2010.
<
<http://www.smithsonianeducation.org/educators/lesson_plans/japanes
e_internment/home_away.html>.

Japanese-American Internment Camps During WWII. J. Willard Marriot Library.

Accessed August 26, 2010.
<http://www.lib.utah.edu/portal/site/marriottlibrary/menuitem.350f279
4f84fb3b29cf87354d1e916b9/?
vgnextoid=2f2b1c769fcfb110VgnVCM1000001c9e619bRCRD>.

Leaving Home. Smithsonian Education. Accessed August 26, 2010.

<http://www.smithsonianeducation.org/educators/lesson_plans/japanes
e_internment/home_away.html>.

Robinson, Greg. By Order of the President: FDR and the internment of

Japanese. Cambridge and London: Harvard University Press. 2001. E-
book.

Sakamoto, Taylor. "The Triumph and Tragedies of Japanese Women in

America: A View Across Four Generations." History Teacher 41.1
(2007): 97-122. Education Research Complete. EBSCO. Web. 29 Aug.
2010.

The history of Japanese Immigration. The Brown Quarterly Volume 3, No. 4

(Spring 2000) -- Asian American History Month. Accessed August 22,
2010. <http://brownvboard.org/brwnqurt/03-4/03-4a.htm>.

Works Cited
 Fietkau 17

The Slow Return. Simithsonian Education. Accessed August 26, 2010

<http://www.smithsonianeducation.org/educators/lesson_plans/japanes
e_internment/slow_return.html>.

Toyosaburo Korematsu v. United States, 323 U.S. 214. History Matters.

Accessed August 26, 2010. <http://historymatters.gmu.edu/d/5151>.
1944.