![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 5 | ← | Archive 8 | Archive 9 | Archive 10 |
It looks like after a lot of debate, and some contentious editors who would test anyone's patience, you all have ended up with a pretty good article. Good job everyone! Lipsticked Pig ( talk) 00:52, 20 February 2010 (UTC)
Not really. A lot of POV still in this article and it's light on evidence of fifth column activity. Better than it was a few years ago but still biased. Why not add some information on the Japanse Civilian Spy Service?
The "Civilian Spy Service" was a paramilitary espionage organization which co-ordinated and supplemented the work of the Army and Navy Intelligence departments of the Tokyo General Staffs. Its directorate, which worked out of the Imperial Palace through the fronts of charitable and cultural organizations, was mostly staffed by retired military intelligence officers. Its agents worked in the diplomatic corps of the Foreign Ministry and the marketing staffs of cartels engaged in foreign trade. Its network blanketed Asia and extended into all major cities of the West. Founded by Emperor Meiji's Imerial Household Minister Count Tanaka Mitsuaki, the spy service was directed throughout most of Hirohito's reign by retired Lieutenant General Banzai Rihachiro."
-Bergamini, p. 1086
"In the two decades since the Meiji era, "Spider" Tanaka had watched the spy service grow until by 1931 it had cast its net over all Asia as far south as Australia, as far west as Iran. By 1941 it would be world-wide, with operatives in every major city of North and South America as well as Europe. When war with the West broke out, President Roosevelt would appraise its fifth-column so highly that he would allow the forcible relocation of of all Americans of Japanese parentage on the West Coast to detention camps inland. In the Philippines when the Japanese army arrived in 1941, U.S. colonials would be surprised to find that Filipino carpenters and masons of Japanese birth stepped immediately into high positions of authority in the Japanese occupation governments. In Baguio (where the author and his family were captured), a chain of command within the Japanese community would spring into being or be activated even before the arrival of the first Japanese occupation forces."
-Bergamini, p.433 -- History Student ( talk) 18:18, 26 February 2010 (UTC)
Much reading needs to be done prior to accept the debunking of Lowman on the word references that may be no more credible than Lowman. This is not good academic rigor. More of what Mr. Lowman said may be found by reading the official transcript (and documents it references) of Mr. Lowman's testimony before congress RE: S. HRG. 98-1304, found at: http://home.comcast.net/~eo9066/1984/IA182.html —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.177.204.109 ( talk) 23:12, 14 June 2010 (UTC) I attempted to add only the link to Lowman's testimony, but it was twice removed. UtahRaptor (or any helpful editor), there was no opinion nor personal statement in the last two attempted posts of a simple link to Lowman's testimony. Please explain the reason for removal. Anybody? 70.177.204.109 ( talk) 23:55, 14 June 2010 (UTC)
That's a rather interesting essay, but slanted. Not sure it's even topical Tedickey ( talk) 00:47, 25 July 2010 (UTC)
The Volga Germans were obviously singled out as a potential "fifth column" and their deportation had a preventive character. It took place in 1941, before the German advance to Stalingrad, and so can be attributed to war hysteria of the moment. In the United States similar measures were taken against Japanese-Americans. [1]
The Soviet textbooks said nothing about the mass deportation, whose American parallel was the internment of the Japanese Americans during World War II. [2]
Ethnic minority harassment during World War II occurred both in the United States and the Soviet Union practically simultaneously. A comparison of the two historical situations, as they are depicted in literature, may be conductive to a better understanding of the character of the respective political regimes. [3]
In 1937-8, 180,000 Koreans around Vladivostok were deported into Central Asia in fear of a war with Japan. But during World War II eight entire Soviet nationalities were identified by the regime as potential German collaborators. Over 80 percent of the 1.5 million ethnic German Soviet citizens were forcibly deported eastward during 1941 and 1942. They were to live in varying but often dreadful conditions for about 14 years, a far more callous version of US relocation camps for Japanese Americans. [4]
In the case of the Volga Germans, to whose territory Hitler's armies never penetrated, the justification was that there was a danger that they might collaborate. There is perhaps a similarity between this case and the Japanese-Americans, though the latter were treated more humanely. [5]
I reverted this edit to the lead section, which added the words "concentration camps" and an internal link to Franklin D. Roosevelt. I notice that the use or non-use of "concentration camps" has been discussed several times in the talk archives. I have no particular recommendation on this issue, but think the wording should be discussed before making changes, as it is likely to be controversial. Cnilep ( talk) 18:44, 1 August 2010 (UTC)
A gardener who is the son of a couple who met at one of the Arizona internment camps, says that part of the motivation for internment was to acquire rich farmland that was owned by Japanese families. Currently the article lacks any reference to this land-grab motivation.
Does anyone have a reference to the land-grab motivation? A reference is needed to add this significant information.
In case it's relevant, he says that two Japanese families in north San Diego county, with financial help from their relatives in Japan, were able to buy back farmlands. These families may be the ones who can attest to the land grab (whether intentional or not).
The gardener also said that many Japanese who were interned do not want to talk to outsiders about internment because they regard their lack of complaining as proof of their patriotism (allegiance to the United States) and their U.S. citizenship. With many of them dying out, this may be the time to ask for information, such as the unmentioned land-grab motivation.
I'm not knowledgeable about this subject, yet I recognize that it parallels a key motivation of the Nazis to put Jews in concentration camps, namely to take/acquire/steal real estate, jewelry, and other valuable property from Jews. VoteFair ( talk) 17:34, 8 August 2010 (UTC)
The article as it is has the following
To this day, some believe that the legality of the internment has been firmly established as exactly the type of scenario spelled out in the Alien and Sedition Acts of 1798. citation needed Among other things, the Alien Enemies Act (which was one of four laws included in the Alien and Sedition Acts) allowed for the United States government, during time of war, to apprehend and detain indefinitely foreign nationals, first-generation citizens, or any others deemed a threat by the government. As no expiration date was set, and the law has never been overruled, it was still in effect during World War II, and still is to this day. citation needed Therefore, some continue to claim that the civil rights violations were, in fact, not violations at all, having been deemed acceptable as a national security measure during time of war by Congress, signed into law by President John Adams, and upheld by the Supreme Court. However, the majority of the detainees were American-born, thus exempt under law from the Alien and Sedition Acts except if found to directly be a threat due to their actions or associations. This exemption was the basis for drafting Nisei to fight in Europe, citation needed as the Laws of Land Warfare prohibit signatory nations (including the United States) from compelling persons to act against their homelands or the allies of their homelands in time of war.
Whoever wrote this has truly taken the sapiens out of homo sapiens. The Alien Enemies Act has never been formally tested in court since the expiration of the Alien and Sedition Acts- for the simple reason that any court today would find it unconstitutional in a heartbeat (and many justices have made statements to that effect.) Sure, it has not been formally repealed. But neither have any number of other absurd laws (like, for example, a certain Baltimore law which makes it illegal to throw bales of hay from a second-story window within the city limits) which no one has felt like repealing for the simple reason that no one has ever felt like enforcing them. It is an embarrassment to Wikipedia that an article as important as this has continued to contain text as insane as this for well over a year. And it is an embarrassment to me to be a member of the same species (let alone the same online community) as whoever wrote it. Unless someone can source this, it's gone. Szfski ( talk) 19:31, 9 October 2010 (UTC)
From the US Department of Justice:
http://blogs.usdoj.gov/blog/archives/1346
"Following the attack on Pearl Harbor, the United States uprooted more than 100,000 people of Japanese descent, most of them American citizens, and confined them in internment camps. The Solicitor General was largely responsible for the defense of those policies.
By the time the cases of Gordon Hirabayashi and Fred Korematsu reached the Supreme Court, the Solicitor General had learned of a key intelligence report that undermined the rationale behind the internment. The Ringle Report, from the Office of Naval Intelligence, found that only a small percentage of Japanese Americans posed a potential security threat, and that the most dangerous were already known or in custody. But the Solicitor General did not inform the Court of the report, despite warnings from Department of Justice attorneys that failing to alert the Court “might approximate the suppression of evidence.” Instead, he argued that it was impossible to segregate loyal Japanese Americans from disloyal ones. Nor did he inform the Court that a key set of allegations used to justify the internment, that Japanese Americans were using radio transmitters to communicate with enemy submarines off the West Coast, had been discredited by the FBI and FCC. And to make matters worse, he relied on gross generalizations about Japanese Americans, such as that they were disloyal and motivated by “racial solidarity.”
The Supreme Court upheld Hirabayashi’s and Korematsu’s convictions. And it took nearly a half century for courts to overturn these decisions. One court decision in the 1980s that did so highlighted the role played by the Solicitor General, emphasizing that the Supreme Court gave “special credence” to the Solicitor General’s representations. The court thought it unlikely that the Supreme Court would have ruled the same way had the Solicitor General exhibited complete candor. Yet those decisions still stand today as a reminder of the mistakes of that era."
This information ought to be incorporated into the article. - Gar2chan ( talk) 14:56, 21 May 2011 (UTC)
There's a problem with the given source: the only reference google finds is a webpage which appears to be an undergraduate's paper, not a published article as implied by the "South Bend Press". Additionally, the source refers to an actual published book or article which is preferable, should someone take the trouble to verify that the cite is factual TEDickey ( talk) 23:52, 12 September 2011 (UTC)
This message is to inform editors interested in the topic of this article that there are new documents from the US National Archives related to the topic now available on Commons. The Commons category " Central Photographic File of the War Relocation Authority, compiled 1942 - 1945" currently contains 3953 files. Please browse the category for images which could be used in this or related articles. These files represent the best quality images of the documents that have been made, and if they duplicate any images already being used, please update the article with the higher-resolution images from the National Archives.
These were uploaded as a result of a cooperation between the National Archives and Wikimedia. Please visit our project page at WP:NARA to learn how help with our collaboration with the National Archives. In addition, any textual documents in the series may be transcribed on Wikisource; please see WS:NARA to get involved in transcribing documents. Dominic· t 18:56, 3 October 2011 (UTC)
I’m wondering if there is information/evidence available to support the addition of a section/sub-section on any political/social justice movement which arose in opposition to the expropriation of private property owned by and the internment of American citizens of Japanese descent during this period? MelioraCogito ( talk) 21:57, 2 March 2012 (UTC)
Many editors forget that Canada is also a part of "North America" and that they also interned people of Japanese descent. There's a photo of one of the camps if you check out the article: Internment! Shouldn't Canadian internment belong in this article as well, or did I miss something as I surfed through? -- Leahtwosaints ( talk) 12:26, 17 May 2013 (UTC)
"Minorly" is not a word. Not sure what was intended. Unclemikejb ( talk) 16:23, 13 July 2013 (UTC)
1/16th ancestry is pretty vicious (sorry for the pov). There would have been no Japanese who traveled before 1860, essentially. So this would have included (unlike Germans with more history in the US) everyone with Japanese ancestry. No one would have had the required 1/15 or less to be excluded. Need a WP:RS that says that though. Student7 ( talk) 20:33, 2 October 2013 (UTC)
There was an inconsistent use of 'Japanese-American" and "Japanese American" in the article, sometimes in the same paragraph or even sentence. Not sure which was correct, I changed as many 'Japanese-American' to "Japanese American" as I could find as I decided the latter was better. Thomas R. Fasulo ( talk) 05:43, 19 February 2013 (UTC)
Considering how the IC's were compared to the German Concentration camps where millions were killed, the death toll would be appreciated. Ericl ( talk) 16:38, 2 November 2013 (UTC) }}
Wikipedia is not WikiNews, nor television nor a journal. See
WP:INDISCRIMINATE. Bendetsen was an appointee, not really a "political" appointee but a military one. While there may be nothing wrong with putting his comment in a "quote" in a citation, inserting it as though it were important in itself, is not useful. The genealogy of Japanese immigration would legally place every Japanese-American in interment (up to 1/16 Japanese). The "one drop of blood" is hyperbole. It might be appropriate if some ranking member of Congress had said it, or some political appointee, but Bendetsen was neither. The phrase meant nothing logically. It would have meant more if the Governor of California had said it, revealing what a most people thought at the time, BTW, though later denying it, of course.
Note that
Earl_Warren#Japanese-American_internment did not try to lie about his complicity. Warren's comments would be more appropriate IMO. He was an elected official who (note) actually claimed to be the moving force behind actual interment. Note that the Hawaiian internment didn't last long for 98% of internees.
Student7 (
talk)
22:06, 18 February 2014 (UTC)
Now I'm having trouble (can't see) "File:Eleanor Roosevelt at Gila River, Arizona at Japanese, American Internment Center - NARA - 197094.jpg". I've used windows-F5 and ctrl-F5. Neither works. Okay with everybody else?
Can see this just fine: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Eleanor_Roosevelt_at_Gila_River,_Arizona_at_Japanese,American_Internment_Center_-_NARA_-_197094.jpg Student7 ( talk) 22:49, 27 March 2014 (UTC)
I don't have the time to get into an edit war with whoever is lording over this article but let me weigh in on any discussion. This article is totally biased. Like some activist wrote it.
For instance, a lot of the "nissei" were kids under 18. The article neglects to mention that key point.
Also, he article bends over backwards to explain the motivations of people renouncing their citizenship, explaining away people that won't foreswear allegiance to an enemy emperor, downplaying the REAL concerns of Americans. Yes some historians might say *now* that there was no real risk of invasion but war is chaos, information is imperfect, and things change. I'm sure the Japanese thought there was no real risk of two nuclear bombs being dropped on their heads.
The quotes are primary sources, and are disallowed by wikipedia because of the ease of which they can be cherry picked.
There are mispresentations, e.g. the cited work quotes the source as "impossible to establish the identity of the loyal and the disloyal with any degree of safety", but the article says "because of their race, it was impossible to determine the loyalty of Japanese Americans". Bad stuff guys, bad stuff.
There are also unsurprisingly, very few citations in the biased stuff. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Richmondian ( talk • contribs) 05:16, 21 February 2015 (UTC)
I noticed that this article belongs to no categories at all, unlike one of its previous revisions, which belonged to several categories. Why were all the categories removed from this article? Jarble ( talk) 01:32, 26 February 2015 (UTC)
Since they were ineligible for citizenship, the first generation, issei, were "Japanese," and could well be considered "enemy aliens." They were not "Japanese Americans." Granted that citizenship "should have" been granted, but it wasn't. In most cases, second generation+, unarguably real Japanese Americans, were also involved for most purposes in this article. But imprisoning or restricting the movements of actual "enemy aliens" was not (and is not) illegal. Student7 ( talk) 19:13, 21 March 2015 (UTC)
I agree that something was wrong (overcrowding and sanitation facilities) when the authorities felt forced to inoculate the population against typhoid.
The smallpox entry is more nuanced or peculiar. Entering schoolchildren were forced to demonstrate that they had a smallpox inoculation in the 1930s. Immigrants were checked for smallpox inoculation before admitting them. So why didn't the Japanese already have a smallpox inoculation? It wasn't so much the danger of an incipient smallpox epidemic but rather the fact that the authorities had discovered that an entire group had fallen into a "failure to inoculate" hole. That is peculiar. At the time, the inoculation left a distinguishing "circle" on a person's arm, so there were no chance they were being "double inoculated" unless, of course, they simply didn't have written "proof", left behind with other belongings. Still, this was an 'important paper" back then, kept with visas, passports, drivers license, etc. It is something they would have brought with them to the camp. Odd IMO.
As to the "40,000" which may sound impressive to somebody: at one shot per minute, not an unachievable rate, even then, it would take 17 weeks for ONE person to administer 40,000 shots, working a normal 40 hour week. (but more likely done by a number of people working at once). The patients are people standing in line, not waiting in a doctors office! I think it is a bit WP:UNDUE and overdone. Sounds good on paper but fails under analysis to demonstrate an imperiled medical system.
I agree the typhoid was serious stuff and deserves mention. Student7 ( talk) 21:35, 30 April 2015 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to one external link on
Internment of Japanese Americans. Please take a moment to review
my edit. If necessary, add {{
cbignore}}
after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{
nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers. — cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 06:40, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
Editor User:Compassionate727 put tag to discuss merging the Presidential Proclamations 2525, 2526, and 2527 article with this article.
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to 3 external links on
Internment of Japanese Americans. Please take a moment to review
my edit. If necessary, add {{
cbignore}}
after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{
nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 17:04, 27 February 2016 (UTC)
When Japanese Americans were asked to confirm whether they were loyal to the Emperor of Japan or the US, "17 percent of the total respondents, 20 percent of the Nisei — gave negative or qualified replies". The reason was not "out of confusion, fear or anger at the wording and implications of the questionnaire". It is quite possible that 17-20% were loyal to the Emperor. Why assume that none were, and that all negative answers were a mistake. That is totally illogical and unsubstantiated. Royalcourtier ( talk) 08:23, 14 April 2016 (UTC)
While there's no serious doubt racism was a major factor, the article itself gives considerable evidence that war panic was a major factor as well. "Determined" is a bit strong to base on a single source, especially one as dubious as a blue-ribbon commission, unless there is language in there naming the commission as the source of the determination.
I suggest changing the sentence to read: "The Commission on Wartime Relocation of Civilians determined that internment resulted more from racism in the West Coast rather than any military danger posed by Japanese Americans.[7][8]"
I prefer the active voice anyway. Yaush ( talk) 19:17, 14 April 2016 (UTC)
Internment of enemy nationals was a common practice in WWII. The internment of Japanese-American citizens happened in that context. What is distinctive here is that many of the Japanese-Americans were citizens. The internment is not unique; their citizenship was. (U.S. citizenship law is of course much different from the citizenship laws of other countries.) -- Iloilo Wanderer ( talk) 12:20, 20 May 2016 (UTC)
I reverted a vague reference to this added to the already overly long lead. If added back (and my preference would be not to), it should probably mention the actual decision and not include a footnote to another wikipedia article. Tom (North Shoreman) ( talk) 00:24, 11 April 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 4 external links on Internment of Japanese Americans. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
{{
dead link}}
tag to
http://www.heartmountain.org/lifeincamp/html{{
dead link}}
tag to
http://www.georgetakei.com/bio.php{{
dead link}}
tag to
http://www.statesmanjournal.com/japanese_internment/intro.htmlWhen you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 05:17, 12 April 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Internment of Japanese Americans. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 23:58, 26 July 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 6 external links on Internment of Japanese Americans. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 15:36, 15 November 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Internment of Japanese Americans. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
{{
dead link}}
tag to
http://topics.wsj.com/person/B/jess-bravin/1268When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 06:29, 21 November 2017 (UTC)
@ Gmatsuda: our style ( MOS:JOBTITLES) is generally that job titles following a name should be in lowercase. Therefore, Dr. James Hirabayashi, Professor Emeritus and former Dean of Ethnic Studies... should be lowercase: Dr. James Hirabayashi, professor emeritus and former dean of ethnic studies..."
This lowercase style is very widespread: not only is it used in our own Manual of Style, but the Chicago Manual and the AP have the same rule, and probably other style guides as well.
As for the "unsigned editorial" vs. "editorial" - if you want "unsigned" in there, I'm OK with it, although as I noted in my prior edit summary, almost all NYT editorials are unsigned in any case.
I would ask that you not mark reverts as minor (they are not, typically). -- Neutrality talk 16:15, 11 December 2015 (UTC)
Questions: 1. Is each fact referenced with an appropriate, reliable reference? 2. Is everything in the article relevant to the article topic? Is there anything that distracted you?
Responses: 1. Each and every fact is referenced with an appropriate and a reliable reference. This article uses superscripts in blue font that if clicked links you to a whole list of sources used on the bottom of the article. 2. Everything in the article is relevant to the article topic. Not only that it's related text, but also pictures and photos that depict the things and locations that are related to Japanese Internment Camps in the US. Dovosh2 ( talk) 17:32, 17 March 2017 (UTC)
What sources are there if any that say president Roosevelt ordered the internment? Executive Order 9066 signed by him allowed it but he did not order it. -- Dvorak4159 ( talk) 00:45, 22 January 2018 (UTC)
But its not a matter of responsibility, it's who ordered it and Dewitt Signed/wrote Civilian exclusion order No. 34 as per https://www.nps.gov/nr/twhp/wwwlps/lessons/89manzanar/89facts2a.htm is that not a reliable enough source? yes, FDR did allow the order but he didn't author it. Also, in what document/speech does it say they ordered the internment as the NPS did not specifically mention that? Dvorak4159 ( talk) 13:53, 22 January 2018 (UTC)
A couple of citations to Densho Encyclopedia are tagged as "Better source needed". Densho is an archive specializing in the internment of Japanese Americans, so I'm not sure what sources would be considered better. I'll remove the tags, but if anyone thinks they should stay then please undo my edit. Mcampany ( talk) 05:57, 31 January 2018 (UTC)Mcampany
There was a sentence in the article that used the phrase "Imperial Japan." True enough that Japan thought itself to be an empire, but for most of the world it was just plain old "Japan," and that's the way Wikipedia should have it, because we rely on English-language sources for usage. Check just about any source, and you will find that it was "Japan," with no modifier. I don't mind linking to "Empire of Japan"; that is entirely appropriate. Thanks! BeenAroundAWhile ( talk) 02:54, 2 February 2018 (UTC)
The Empire of Japan (1868-1947) did not only control the traditional Japanese islands. It annexed the Korean Peninsula, areas of China, and during World War II it was occupying large areas of both East Asia and Southeast Asia.
The article specifies that the internment orders were not only covering those of Japanese ancestry, but populations which were subjects to the Empire: "Korean-Americans and Taiwanese, classified as ethnically Japanese because both Korea and Taiwan were Japanese colonies at the time, were also included." Dimadick ( talk) 10:19, 2 February 2018 (UTC)
Simply saying "Japan" would be grossly and intentionally misleading, confusing modern "Japan" with the "Empire of Japan". We could easily say the "Imperial Japanese Navy". Vivexdino ( talk) 01:26, 15 February 2018 (UTC)
The photo in the section on education in the camps is partially captioned, "Flag of allegiance pledge." This makes no sense and is simply grammatically incorrect. It should be rewritten to read something like, "Pledge of allegiance to the flag," or simply, "Pledge of allegience." 2600:1700:4070:6240:714E:AA6B:73BC:7817 ( talk) 00:33, 20 February 2018 (UTC)
The section relating to the Department of Justice internment camps is written as if it were an editorial. Although it attempts objectivity, the section comes off as conveying a point of view. The problems start with the third paragraph and continue until the end. Lines like "your opinion of the facts", "one must wonder" and "This leaves one to guess", along with questions posed to the reader, need to be removed, and the entire section should probably be rewritten. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.84.107.194 ( talk) 04:32, 9 January 2014 (UTC)
This section doesn't really discuss the actual DOJ facilities, which also held German and Italian Americans and about 5,500 Issei and Kibei, but focuses almost exclusively on the deportation and confinement of Japanese from Latin America. I propose moving most of the current text to a new section called "Japanese Latin Americans," probably after the sections on Hawaii in "Exclusion, removal and detention," and reworking the "DOJ Internment Camps" section. Do these changes seem appropriate to others? MartinaDee ( talk) 01:21, 26 February 2014 (UTC)
```` — Preceding unsigned comment added by Starhistory22 ( talk • contribs) 20:58, 7 February 2014 (UTC)
Being Japanese ethnically made them enemies hmm. You know the funny thing is we cry out that these wars were fought for freedom meanwhile we talk about how it was ok to Jail 3rd or 4th gen American citizens because their ancestors came from a country that was at war with them 50 years or so later. We also Denied many Jews from landing here even though they were fleeing the Nazis. We also talk about the holocaust and how every sane human is shocked at how even children and babies could be massacred just because they were Jewish and yet ignore the Chinese massacres committed by the Japanese for "Security" and how American forces nuked children, and babies and pregnant women and mutated human beings. But you know we are the good guys. Also your point about how Japan treated it's foreign populations? IRRELEVANT American citizens whose ancestors left a nation a few generations ago are not responsible, if the nation from which your ancestor lies where to persecute conservatives, would we suddenly say ok well that means we have legitimacy to now persecute you. How , unless we went to war where-ever your ancestors are from and than say well we are afraid and our security requires your internment. I bet we would here some protests from you than. If you support the internment of people even third or fourth generation Americans simply for ancestor than you should have no problem having your territory taken away and your freedom taken away and being treated by everyone for the next 20 or so years as an enemy or subhuman as many Japanese-Americans felt. The reason it seems PC to you is simply because just like the holocaust, 95% of scholars are going to recognize it for what it is. An injustice. The rise of some pseudo-neo-conservative movement only does damage to itself. Many times things are labeled liberal or leftist bias on Wikipedia, when really it is for the most part supported by CONSERVATIVE or REPUBLICAN tradition scholars as having offended American rights. Ridiculous. It is actually right wing or conservative values that support American rights from a government encroaching on them or the constitution. Ridiculous. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.69.176.102 ( talk) 04:01, 29 October 2014 (UTC)
The total glossing over of the Niihau Incident in order to push a racist agenda is indicative of how hopelessly slanted Wikipedia is. I'm terribly disappointed. Not a word about Japanese American citizens trying to murder Hawaiian Americans in acts of war as traitors acting for the Japanese Emperor.
Fuck Wikipedia.
CitizenDaveS (
talk)
08:20, 1 April 2018 (UTC)
Based on information in Conn, et al, Guarding the United States and its Outposts, pp. 120-123, which I have cited, I've added information on the influence of the Roberts Commission report to this article, and to the articles on that report, the Western Defense Command, and Gen. John L. DeWitt. Information on the report's accusations of Japanese espionage was previously absent from these articles. RobDuch ( talk) 01:44, 17 June 2018 (UTC)
although the population of Japanese Americans in the eastern areas of the country was and is lower and there were no camps east of the Mississippi shouldnt they at least be mentioned in the context of world war 2? as far as I know no other article on Wikipedia says anything about Japanese Americans in the east during the war. Razorhawk4595 ( talk) 20:08, 14 February 2019 (UTC)
I think there is a statement in this article that's too ambiguous and in need of some clarification. Namely, this one:
Despite the incident, the Territorial Governor of Hawaii rejected calls for the mass internment of the Japanese Americans living there.
This doesn't clarify which territorial governor it was who was against the mass internment of Japanese Americans. There were two during the Presidency of Franklin D. Roosevelt: Joseph Poindexter and Ingram Stainback. So which of them is this sentence referring to? I honestly don't know, otherwise I would have clarified this myself. Maximajorian Viridio ( talk) 16:35, 14 February 2019 (UTC)
I clarified the statement, it was Joseph Poindexter Razorhawk4595 ( talk) 20:38, 14 February 2019 (UTC)
Moved from User talk:Reywas92, @ Gmatsuda::
Thanks for your thoughtful edits to the Tule Lake, Manzanar and probably other camp articles. Please note what you're trying to do—move that to the main article—has been tried several times before, only to have it watered down rather badly each time. I've found the duplication easier, even though duplication, on its face, makes little sense. -- Gmatsuda ( talk) 06:32, 18 March 2019 (UTC)
I fully support content on the use of the euphemism and RS discussion on more accuate terminology. I do not endorse having excessively long quotations, including copying from half of an article, or a long paraphrase masquerading as a quotation. This section needs to be rewritten to take the main arguments from the sources more concisely. Most of all, sections should not be copied and pasted across articles in general, especially not as a long overview that does not relate specifically to that camp. Reywas92 Talk 20:05, 18 March 2019 (UTC)
Is there any evidence of Japanese-Americans showing emporer worship through ceremonies at their temples on the auspicious days in the decades prior to World War 2? If you look at even modern Thai society and Thai-Americans in relation to their worship and fanatacism relating to its royals family, you might find it shows some connections to the way Japanese would have acted in that past period. Thai-Americans fit in well into America society but you will find that few are willing to publicly speak out agains the Thai royal family or Thai regime in power due to the fear of loss of access to Thailand and possible reprisals against their families. With the Thai royals allowing their most devoted supporters to commit human rights abuses in their name, there is little condemnation from the US Thai community which has around 400,00 members. Thais pay tribute to the abusive Thai royals at temples and Thai businesses in the US. They even have a monument to King Bhumiphol in Cambridge Massachusetts. I would find it very surprising that Japanese Americans in the 1930s and 40s would show condemnation of the Japanese emporer at that time. In fact, most probably went along with their community leaders and and temples and worshiped him and the royal institution. This is an area that should be investigated. My experience is with the Thai-American community so that's why I made the connection here. How did Japanese Americans hold the emporer at that time? A lack of evidence of condemnation from Japanese Americans is not apathy or disinterest by the way. It may well mean fear on their part or approval. 203.131.210.82 ( talk) 05:33, 1 April 2019 (UTC) 203.131.210.82 ( talk) 05:35, 1 April 2019 (UTC)
Some versions of this article claim that Roosevelt personally ordered all of these actions, when in reality his orders were very limited in nature and it was General DeWitt who planned and carried out the mass interments while abusing order 9066. DeWitt's actions should not be excluded from the summary, as it was his plan and he was in charge of carrying it out.
Blaming FDR for DeWitt's personal plans and actions is not accurate and honest because there is no evidence to show that FDR knew what DeWitt had in plan. The only evidence that FDR was involved are assumptions that DeWitt was honest with him when he showed FDR a presentation. There is no evidence to suggest FDR knew of DeWitts personal plans and his intent to abuse order 9066.
Nothing FDR ever ordered was even remotely similar to what DeWitt did, and DeWitt was solely responsible for abusing the authority granted to him in order 9066. -- — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:100a:b016:5bc7:9517:a1a:2383:76e3 ( talk • contribs)
Per WP:LENGTH, the article is too long and should be 1/4 to 1/2 the size. The guideline says "> 100 kB Almost certainly should be divided". Currently the article is at "221,018 bytes". I think that we should remove most of the quotations and other first party sorces and stick to WP:THIRDPARTYSOURCES especially when it comes to causes and justification. We can also shorten what is listed in the legacy and other sections. Remember Wikipedia is WP:NOTADIRECTORY. -- Iloilo Wanderer ( talk) 10:15, 19 March 2020 (UTC)
The lead introductory section is supposed to be concise summary of the article. MOS:LEAD says, "As a general rule of thumb, a lead section should contain no more than four well-composed paragraphs and be carefully sourced as appropriate." The current intro is 6 long wordy paragraphs. I do not have the time now but I will cut it down. Maybe to a single paragraph. Often will long articles the best is a short lead and then get straight to the article.-- Iloilo Wanderer ( talk) 10:08, 19 March 2020 (UTC)
Journalist Gus Russo has several pages discussing the systematic private profiteering at the expense of Japanese Americans following the attack on Pearl Harbor in his book, Supermob: How Sidney Korshak and His Criminal Associates Became America's Hidden Power Brokers (Bloomsbury, 2007). The book was reviewed in SFGate by Trey Popp, who writes: "Russo's chapter on the shameless plundering of the assets of imprisoned Japanese Americans during World War II, presided over by a bevy of Korshak's associates, is particularly stirring." The book was also reviewed in the Chicago Tribune by Hillel Levin, who writes: "[Jacob Arvey's] clout with the Truman administration put a protege in charge of property seized from German companies and interned Japanese-Americans. Russo documents how these West Coast assets were sold for a fraction of their value to silent mob partners and the young lawyers, Arvey accomplices, who served as their frontmen." Russo also mentions how the reparations paid to Japanese Americans in the 1980s amounted to probably pennies on the dollar. It might be good to work some of this material into the article but I will also leave a similar suggestion on the talk pages of related articles. -- Mox La Push ( talk) 09:34, 15 May 2020 (UTC)
Should the term 'concentration camp' really be used here? It has significant POV connotations. – Jadebenn ( talk · contribs · subpages) 06:59, 6 September 2020 (UTC)
This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available
on the course page. Student editor(s):
Dovosh2.
Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT ( talk) 00:42, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 19 August 2021 and 9 December 2021. Further details are available
on the course page. Student editor(s):
Papilio Charontis. Peer reviewers:
HandsomeSquidward311,
Jordanshie.
Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT ( talk) 23:06, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
This article begins with the heading After Pearl Harbor - also spelled Harbour. Full understanding of the Japanese relocation must begin with material years BEFORE Pearl Harbor. It begins in the British and American embassies to Japan. The concerns of those ambassadors caused a chain of events political, military, legal, and geographic. The conferring heads of Canada and the USA triggered communication between their militaries, also between the FBI and the Royal Canadian Mounted Police. The signal event in BOTH countries was the obligatory issuance of IDENTITY CARDS to residents of Japanese origin or descent. Each nation had plans on the books for dealing with "their Japs" - including potential intern camp sites - perhaps 2 years before December 1941. Finding this material now is not easy.
Missing from history, IMO, is mention of a fraternal organization called Sons of the Golden West. It existed from San Diego to Vancouver, and appealed mostly to police officers. It felt one of its social obligations was to address the "Yellow Peril" of Asian immigrants, who began arriving by 1850. It seems no coincidence that there are some similarities to the KKK. --Ed Chilton
That is the Native Sons of the Golden West. They were not like the KKK, and changed their minds on this issue after the war. Dedicated several schools, with plaques proclaiming “ Justice, Liberty, and Tolerance” Some before-and-after quotes could improve the article. 2600:1010:B05A:B6E3:4528:E122:2230:895A ( talk) 18:50, 21 May 2022 (UTC)
He was supposed to have objected to this, and got in a fight with Earl Warren about it, before FDR told him to be quiet. I see nothing about it here. Could we have more info on this? 2600:1010:B05A:B6E3:4528:E122:2230:895A ( talk) 18:53, 21 May 2022 (UTC)
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 22 August 2022 and 16 December 2022. Further details are available
on the course page. Student editor(s):
Ej2022 (
article contribs). Peer reviewers:
EZEKEATHAN.
— Assignment last updated by E Middle March ( talk) 13:29, 9 November 2022 (UTC)
I'd like to rename this page "Incarceration of Japanese Americans." Given the ongoing debate on this talk page about whether to use the language of "concentration camps," (which I, as a Jew, do by the way believe is appropriate to describe Japanese incarceration) modify the language to "incarceration camps," which is still more accurate than the euphemistic "internment camps."
As per these essays, the term internment is a historical euphemism that is not a legally appropriate description of the forced relocation and incarceration of Japanese Americans:
https://www.npr.org/sections/publiceditor/2012/02/10/146691773/euphemisms-concentration-camps-and-the-japanese-internment https://www.nps.gov/tule/learn/education/upload/RDaniels_euphemisms.pdf https://www.hawaiinewsnow.com/2021/04/13/internment-or-incarceration-why-words-matter-describe-japanese-american-wartime-experience/ https://www.npr.org/2018/12/26/636107892/some-japanese-americans-wrongfully-imprisoned-during-wwii-oppose-census-question https://www.npr.org/2019/07/05/739051933/this-isnt-the-first-time-americans-have-debated-what-to-call-detention-centers
With the move to a new title, it should be noted that the term internment has been used euphemistically. Likeanechointheforest ( talk) 19:05, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
From Wikipedia:
The Wikipedia article I have selected is about the internment of Japanese Americans, which was another racial attack to a minority group during the 20th century and mainly affected the West Coast, making it part of the history of California. The article is very well developed, as it is an extensive article with plenty of details and it is written very well. It breaks it down into sections and it includes details about who all was involved, when, where, and what happened after the internment of Japanese Americans. In addition, the article is written neutrally as it specifically provides facts, rather than the author’s opinion. Lastly, although the article is lengthy, the author provided over 130 references related to the information provided by in the article.
From your Ebook chapter:
The Ebook California : A History, chapter, “Discrimination and Accommodation,” page 187 makes emphasizes on the prosecution that minority groups were suffering and the attempts to stop it during the 20th century, which is now part of the history of the state of California. An example is the organization of Asiatic Exclusion League, a group against Asian minorities. This organization was responsible for discriminating Asian children, as they were not allowed in the same schools as Caucasians. — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
FeedurBrain (
talk •
contribs)
22:47, 17 November 2021 (UTC)
Would you consider changing it to Japanese American concentration camps? or World War II Japanese American Incarceration? I'm trying to think of alternatives that would address the concerns of the Japanese American community--the Japanese American Citizens League, Densho, the Japanese American National Museum, as well as leading scholars in the field (like Roger Daniels) state that the term internment is historically inaccurate, while the term concentration camps was historically used by FDR and members of his administration, and the idea will be more recognizable to an American audience as many members of the media already call them Japanese American concentration camps. Hcmaruyama ( talk) 18:37, 7 April 2022 (UTC)
I think calling them incarceration camps is more accurate than calling them concentration camps or internment camps. First of all, the definition of the term concentration camp is "a place which large numbers of people, especially political prisoners or members of persecuted minorities, are deliberately imprisoned in a relatively small area with inadequate facilities, sometimes to provide forced labour or mass executions". Japanese American camps easily stand out when compared to Nazi concentration camps, Ustaše-run concentration camps, or Italian concentration camps because nobody performed forced labour there or was systematically killed there. Also Unit 731 and Plantation complexes in the Southern United States meets the definition of concentration camps better than Japanese American camps. While I do agree that calling them "internment camps" is euphemistic, I think calling them "concentration camps" is dysphemistic. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.144.204.68 ( talk) 21:48, 1 June 2023 (UTC)
![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 5 | ← | Archive 8 | Archive 9 | Archive 10 |
It looks like after a lot of debate, and some contentious editors who would test anyone's patience, you all have ended up with a pretty good article. Good job everyone! Lipsticked Pig ( talk) 00:52, 20 February 2010 (UTC)
Not really. A lot of POV still in this article and it's light on evidence of fifth column activity. Better than it was a few years ago but still biased. Why not add some information on the Japanse Civilian Spy Service?
The "Civilian Spy Service" was a paramilitary espionage organization which co-ordinated and supplemented the work of the Army and Navy Intelligence departments of the Tokyo General Staffs. Its directorate, which worked out of the Imperial Palace through the fronts of charitable and cultural organizations, was mostly staffed by retired military intelligence officers. Its agents worked in the diplomatic corps of the Foreign Ministry and the marketing staffs of cartels engaged in foreign trade. Its network blanketed Asia and extended into all major cities of the West. Founded by Emperor Meiji's Imerial Household Minister Count Tanaka Mitsuaki, the spy service was directed throughout most of Hirohito's reign by retired Lieutenant General Banzai Rihachiro."
-Bergamini, p. 1086
"In the two decades since the Meiji era, "Spider" Tanaka had watched the spy service grow until by 1931 it had cast its net over all Asia as far south as Australia, as far west as Iran. By 1941 it would be world-wide, with operatives in every major city of North and South America as well as Europe. When war with the West broke out, President Roosevelt would appraise its fifth-column so highly that he would allow the forcible relocation of of all Americans of Japanese parentage on the West Coast to detention camps inland. In the Philippines when the Japanese army arrived in 1941, U.S. colonials would be surprised to find that Filipino carpenters and masons of Japanese birth stepped immediately into high positions of authority in the Japanese occupation governments. In Baguio (where the author and his family were captured), a chain of command within the Japanese community would spring into being or be activated even before the arrival of the first Japanese occupation forces."
-Bergamini, p.433 -- History Student ( talk) 18:18, 26 February 2010 (UTC)
Much reading needs to be done prior to accept the debunking of Lowman on the word references that may be no more credible than Lowman. This is not good academic rigor. More of what Mr. Lowman said may be found by reading the official transcript (and documents it references) of Mr. Lowman's testimony before congress RE: S. HRG. 98-1304, found at: http://home.comcast.net/~eo9066/1984/IA182.html —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.177.204.109 ( talk) 23:12, 14 June 2010 (UTC) I attempted to add only the link to Lowman's testimony, but it was twice removed. UtahRaptor (or any helpful editor), there was no opinion nor personal statement in the last two attempted posts of a simple link to Lowman's testimony. Please explain the reason for removal. Anybody? 70.177.204.109 ( talk) 23:55, 14 June 2010 (UTC)
That's a rather interesting essay, but slanted. Not sure it's even topical Tedickey ( talk) 00:47, 25 July 2010 (UTC)
The Volga Germans were obviously singled out as a potential "fifth column" and their deportation had a preventive character. It took place in 1941, before the German advance to Stalingrad, and so can be attributed to war hysteria of the moment. In the United States similar measures were taken against Japanese-Americans. [1]
The Soviet textbooks said nothing about the mass deportation, whose American parallel was the internment of the Japanese Americans during World War II. [2]
Ethnic minority harassment during World War II occurred both in the United States and the Soviet Union practically simultaneously. A comparison of the two historical situations, as they are depicted in literature, may be conductive to a better understanding of the character of the respective political regimes. [3]
In 1937-8, 180,000 Koreans around Vladivostok were deported into Central Asia in fear of a war with Japan. But during World War II eight entire Soviet nationalities were identified by the regime as potential German collaborators. Over 80 percent of the 1.5 million ethnic German Soviet citizens were forcibly deported eastward during 1941 and 1942. They were to live in varying but often dreadful conditions for about 14 years, a far more callous version of US relocation camps for Japanese Americans. [4]
In the case of the Volga Germans, to whose territory Hitler's armies never penetrated, the justification was that there was a danger that they might collaborate. There is perhaps a similarity between this case and the Japanese-Americans, though the latter were treated more humanely. [5]
I reverted this edit to the lead section, which added the words "concentration camps" and an internal link to Franklin D. Roosevelt. I notice that the use or non-use of "concentration camps" has been discussed several times in the talk archives. I have no particular recommendation on this issue, but think the wording should be discussed before making changes, as it is likely to be controversial. Cnilep ( talk) 18:44, 1 August 2010 (UTC)
A gardener who is the son of a couple who met at one of the Arizona internment camps, says that part of the motivation for internment was to acquire rich farmland that was owned by Japanese families. Currently the article lacks any reference to this land-grab motivation.
Does anyone have a reference to the land-grab motivation? A reference is needed to add this significant information.
In case it's relevant, he says that two Japanese families in north San Diego county, with financial help from their relatives in Japan, were able to buy back farmlands. These families may be the ones who can attest to the land grab (whether intentional or not).
The gardener also said that many Japanese who were interned do not want to talk to outsiders about internment because they regard their lack of complaining as proof of their patriotism (allegiance to the United States) and their U.S. citizenship. With many of them dying out, this may be the time to ask for information, such as the unmentioned land-grab motivation.
I'm not knowledgeable about this subject, yet I recognize that it parallels a key motivation of the Nazis to put Jews in concentration camps, namely to take/acquire/steal real estate, jewelry, and other valuable property from Jews. VoteFair ( talk) 17:34, 8 August 2010 (UTC)
The article as it is has the following
To this day, some believe that the legality of the internment has been firmly established as exactly the type of scenario spelled out in the Alien and Sedition Acts of 1798. citation needed Among other things, the Alien Enemies Act (which was one of four laws included in the Alien and Sedition Acts) allowed for the United States government, during time of war, to apprehend and detain indefinitely foreign nationals, first-generation citizens, or any others deemed a threat by the government. As no expiration date was set, and the law has never been overruled, it was still in effect during World War II, and still is to this day. citation needed Therefore, some continue to claim that the civil rights violations were, in fact, not violations at all, having been deemed acceptable as a national security measure during time of war by Congress, signed into law by President John Adams, and upheld by the Supreme Court. However, the majority of the detainees were American-born, thus exempt under law from the Alien and Sedition Acts except if found to directly be a threat due to their actions or associations. This exemption was the basis for drafting Nisei to fight in Europe, citation needed as the Laws of Land Warfare prohibit signatory nations (including the United States) from compelling persons to act against their homelands or the allies of their homelands in time of war.
Whoever wrote this has truly taken the sapiens out of homo sapiens. The Alien Enemies Act has never been formally tested in court since the expiration of the Alien and Sedition Acts- for the simple reason that any court today would find it unconstitutional in a heartbeat (and many justices have made statements to that effect.) Sure, it has not been formally repealed. But neither have any number of other absurd laws (like, for example, a certain Baltimore law which makes it illegal to throw bales of hay from a second-story window within the city limits) which no one has felt like repealing for the simple reason that no one has ever felt like enforcing them. It is an embarrassment to Wikipedia that an article as important as this has continued to contain text as insane as this for well over a year. And it is an embarrassment to me to be a member of the same species (let alone the same online community) as whoever wrote it. Unless someone can source this, it's gone. Szfski ( talk) 19:31, 9 October 2010 (UTC)
From the US Department of Justice:
http://blogs.usdoj.gov/blog/archives/1346
"Following the attack on Pearl Harbor, the United States uprooted more than 100,000 people of Japanese descent, most of them American citizens, and confined them in internment camps. The Solicitor General was largely responsible for the defense of those policies.
By the time the cases of Gordon Hirabayashi and Fred Korematsu reached the Supreme Court, the Solicitor General had learned of a key intelligence report that undermined the rationale behind the internment. The Ringle Report, from the Office of Naval Intelligence, found that only a small percentage of Japanese Americans posed a potential security threat, and that the most dangerous were already known or in custody. But the Solicitor General did not inform the Court of the report, despite warnings from Department of Justice attorneys that failing to alert the Court “might approximate the suppression of evidence.” Instead, he argued that it was impossible to segregate loyal Japanese Americans from disloyal ones. Nor did he inform the Court that a key set of allegations used to justify the internment, that Japanese Americans were using radio transmitters to communicate with enemy submarines off the West Coast, had been discredited by the FBI and FCC. And to make matters worse, he relied on gross generalizations about Japanese Americans, such as that they were disloyal and motivated by “racial solidarity.”
The Supreme Court upheld Hirabayashi’s and Korematsu’s convictions. And it took nearly a half century for courts to overturn these decisions. One court decision in the 1980s that did so highlighted the role played by the Solicitor General, emphasizing that the Supreme Court gave “special credence” to the Solicitor General’s representations. The court thought it unlikely that the Supreme Court would have ruled the same way had the Solicitor General exhibited complete candor. Yet those decisions still stand today as a reminder of the mistakes of that era."
This information ought to be incorporated into the article. - Gar2chan ( talk) 14:56, 21 May 2011 (UTC)
There's a problem with the given source: the only reference google finds is a webpage which appears to be an undergraduate's paper, not a published article as implied by the "South Bend Press". Additionally, the source refers to an actual published book or article which is preferable, should someone take the trouble to verify that the cite is factual TEDickey ( talk) 23:52, 12 September 2011 (UTC)
This message is to inform editors interested in the topic of this article that there are new documents from the US National Archives related to the topic now available on Commons. The Commons category " Central Photographic File of the War Relocation Authority, compiled 1942 - 1945" currently contains 3953 files. Please browse the category for images which could be used in this or related articles. These files represent the best quality images of the documents that have been made, and if they duplicate any images already being used, please update the article with the higher-resolution images from the National Archives.
These were uploaded as a result of a cooperation between the National Archives and Wikimedia. Please visit our project page at WP:NARA to learn how help with our collaboration with the National Archives. In addition, any textual documents in the series may be transcribed on Wikisource; please see WS:NARA to get involved in transcribing documents. Dominic· t 18:56, 3 October 2011 (UTC)
I’m wondering if there is information/evidence available to support the addition of a section/sub-section on any political/social justice movement which arose in opposition to the expropriation of private property owned by and the internment of American citizens of Japanese descent during this period? MelioraCogito ( talk) 21:57, 2 March 2012 (UTC)
Many editors forget that Canada is also a part of "North America" and that they also interned people of Japanese descent. There's a photo of one of the camps if you check out the article: Internment! Shouldn't Canadian internment belong in this article as well, or did I miss something as I surfed through? -- Leahtwosaints ( talk) 12:26, 17 May 2013 (UTC)
"Minorly" is not a word. Not sure what was intended. Unclemikejb ( talk) 16:23, 13 July 2013 (UTC)
1/16th ancestry is pretty vicious (sorry for the pov). There would have been no Japanese who traveled before 1860, essentially. So this would have included (unlike Germans with more history in the US) everyone with Japanese ancestry. No one would have had the required 1/15 or less to be excluded. Need a WP:RS that says that though. Student7 ( talk) 20:33, 2 October 2013 (UTC)
There was an inconsistent use of 'Japanese-American" and "Japanese American" in the article, sometimes in the same paragraph or even sentence. Not sure which was correct, I changed as many 'Japanese-American' to "Japanese American" as I could find as I decided the latter was better. Thomas R. Fasulo ( talk) 05:43, 19 February 2013 (UTC)
Considering how the IC's were compared to the German Concentration camps where millions were killed, the death toll would be appreciated. Ericl ( talk) 16:38, 2 November 2013 (UTC) }}
Wikipedia is not WikiNews, nor television nor a journal. See
WP:INDISCRIMINATE. Bendetsen was an appointee, not really a "political" appointee but a military one. While there may be nothing wrong with putting his comment in a "quote" in a citation, inserting it as though it were important in itself, is not useful. The genealogy of Japanese immigration would legally place every Japanese-American in interment (up to 1/16 Japanese). The "one drop of blood" is hyperbole. It might be appropriate if some ranking member of Congress had said it, or some political appointee, but Bendetsen was neither. The phrase meant nothing logically. It would have meant more if the Governor of California had said it, revealing what a most people thought at the time, BTW, though later denying it, of course.
Note that
Earl_Warren#Japanese-American_internment did not try to lie about his complicity. Warren's comments would be more appropriate IMO. He was an elected official who (note) actually claimed to be the moving force behind actual interment. Note that the Hawaiian internment didn't last long for 98% of internees.
Student7 (
talk)
22:06, 18 February 2014 (UTC)
Now I'm having trouble (can't see) "File:Eleanor Roosevelt at Gila River, Arizona at Japanese, American Internment Center - NARA - 197094.jpg". I've used windows-F5 and ctrl-F5. Neither works. Okay with everybody else?
Can see this just fine: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Eleanor_Roosevelt_at_Gila_River,_Arizona_at_Japanese,American_Internment_Center_-_NARA_-_197094.jpg Student7 ( talk) 22:49, 27 March 2014 (UTC)
I don't have the time to get into an edit war with whoever is lording over this article but let me weigh in on any discussion. This article is totally biased. Like some activist wrote it.
For instance, a lot of the "nissei" were kids under 18. The article neglects to mention that key point.
Also, he article bends over backwards to explain the motivations of people renouncing their citizenship, explaining away people that won't foreswear allegiance to an enemy emperor, downplaying the REAL concerns of Americans. Yes some historians might say *now* that there was no real risk of invasion but war is chaos, information is imperfect, and things change. I'm sure the Japanese thought there was no real risk of two nuclear bombs being dropped on their heads.
The quotes are primary sources, and are disallowed by wikipedia because of the ease of which they can be cherry picked.
There are mispresentations, e.g. the cited work quotes the source as "impossible to establish the identity of the loyal and the disloyal with any degree of safety", but the article says "because of their race, it was impossible to determine the loyalty of Japanese Americans". Bad stuff guys, bad stuff.
There are also unsurprisingly, very few citations in the biased stuff. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Richmondian ( talk • contribs) 05:16, 21 February 2015 (UTC)
I noticed that this article belongs to no categories at all, unlike one of its previous revisions, which belonged to several categories. Why were all the categories removed from this article? Jarble ( talk) 01:32, 26 February 2015 (UTC)
Since they were ineligible for citizenship, the first generation, issei, were "Japanese," and could well be considered "enemy aliens." They were not "Japanese Americans." Granted that citizenship "should have" been granted, but it wasn't. In most cases, second generation+, unarguably real Japanese Americans, were also involved for most purposes in this article. But imprisoning or restricting the movements of actual "enemy aliens" was not (and is not) illegal. Student7 ( talk) 19:13, 21 March 2015 (UTC)
I agree that something was wrong (overcrowding and sanitation facilities) when the authorities felt forced to inoculate the population against typhoid.
The smallpox entry is more nuanced or peculiar. Entering schoolchildren were forced to demonstrate that they had a smallpox inoculation in the 1930s. Immigrants were checked for smallpox inoculation before admitting them. So why didn't the Japanese already have a smallpox inoculation? It wasn't so much the danger of an incipient smallpox epidemic but rather the fact that the authorities had discovered that an entire group had fallen into a "failure to inoculate" hole. That is peculiar. At the time, the inoculation left a distinguishing "circle" on a person's arm, so there were no chance they were being "double inoculated" unless, of course, they simply didn't have written "proof", left behind with other belongings. Still, this was an 'important paper" back then, kept with visas, passports, drivers license, etc. It is something they would have brought with them to the camp. Odd IMO.
As to the "40,000" which may sound impressive to somebody: at one shot per minute, not an unachievable rate, even then, it would take 17 weeks for ONE person to administer 40,000 shots, working a normal 40 hour week. (but more likely done by a number of people working at once). The patients are people standing in line, not waiting in a doctors office! I think it is a bit WP:UNDUE and overdone. Sounds good on paper but fails under analysis to demonstrate an imperiled medical system.
I agree the typhoid was serious stuff and deserves mention. Student7 ( talk) 21:35, 30 April 2015 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to one external link on
Internment of Japanese Americans. Please take a moment to review
my edit. If necessary, add {{
cbignore}}
after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{
nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers. — cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 06:40, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
Editor User:Compassionate727 put tag to discuss merging the Presidential Proclamations 2525, 2526, and 2527 article with this article.
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to 3 external links on
Internment of Japanese Americans. Please take a moment to review
my edit. If necessary, add {{
cbignore}}
after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{
nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 17:04, 27 February 2016 (UTC)
When Japanese Americans were asked to confirm whether they were loyal to the Emperor of Japan or the US, "17 percent of the total respondents, 20 percent of the Nisei — gave negative or qualified replies". The reason was not "out of confusion, fear or anger at the wording and implications of the questionnaire". It is quite possible that 17-20% were loyal to the Emperor. Why assume that none were, and that all negative answers were a mistake. That is totally illogical and unsubstantiated. Royalcourtier ( talk) 08:23, 14 April 2016 (UTC)
While there's no serious doubt racism was a major factor, the article itself gives considerable evidence that war panic was a major factor as well. "Determined" is a bit strong to base on a single source, especially one as dubious as a blue-ribbon commission, unless there is language in there naming the commission as the source of the determination.
I suggest changing the sentence to read: "The Commission on Wartime Relocation of Civilians determined that internment resulted more from racism in the West Coast rather than any military danger posed by Japanese Americans.[7][8]"
I prefer the active voice anyway. Yaush ( talk) 19:17, 14 April 2016 (UTC)
Internment of enemy nationals was a common practice in WWII. The internment of Japanese-American citizens happened in that context. What is distinctive here is that many of the Japanese-Americans were citizens. The internment is not unique; their citizenship was. (U.S. citizenship law is of course much different from the citizenship laws of other countries.) -- Iloilo Wanderer ( talk) 12:20, 20 May 2016 (UTC)
I reverted a vague reference to this added to the already overly long lead. If added back (and my preference would be not to), it should probably mention the actual decision and not include a footnote to another wikipedia article. Tom (North Shoreman) ( talk) 00:24, 11 April 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 4 external links on Internment of Japanese Americans. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
{{
dead link}}
tag to
http://www.heartmountain.org/lifeincamp/html{{
dead link}}
tag to
http://www.georgetakei.com/bio.php{{
dead link}}
tag to
http://www.statesmanjournal.com/japanese_internment/intro.htmlWhen you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 05:17, 12 April 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Internment of Japanese Americans. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 23:58, 26 July 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 6 external links on Internment of Japanese Americans. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 15:36, 15 November 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Internment of Japanese Americans. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
{{
dead link}}
tag to
http://topics.wsj.com/person/B/jess-bravin/1268When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 06:29, 21 November 2017 (UTC)
@ Gmatsuda: our style ( MOS:JOBTITLES) is generally that job titles following a name should be in lowercase. Therefore, Dr. James Hirabayashi, Professor Emeritus and former Dean of Ethnic Studies... should be lowercase: Dr. James Hirabayashi, professor emeritus and former dean of ethnic studies..."
This lowercase style is very widespread: not only is it used in our own Manual of Style, but the Chicago Manual and the AP have the same rule, and probably other style guides as well.
As for the "unsigned editorial" vs. "editorial" - if you want "unsigned" in there, I'm OK with it, although as I noted in my prior edit summary, almost all NYT editorials are unsigned in any case.
I would ask that you not mark reverts as minor (they are not, typically). -- Neutrality talk 16:15, 11 December 2015 (UTC)
Questions: 1. Is each fact referenced with an appropriate, reliable reference? 2. Is everything in the article relevant to the article topic? Is there anything that distracted you?
Responses: 1. Each and every fact is referenced with an appropriate and a reliable reference. This article uses superscripts in blue font that if clicked links you to a whole list of sources used on the bottom of the article. 2. Everything in the article is relevant to the article topic. Not only that it's related text, but also pictures and photos that depict the things and locations that are related to Japanese Internment Camps in the US. Dovosh2 ( talk) 17:32, 17 March 2017 (UTC)
What sources are there if any that say president Roosevelt ordered the internment? Executive Order 9066 signed by him allowed it but he did not order it. -- Dvorak4159 ( talk) 00:45, 22 January 2018 (UTC)
But its not a matter of responsibility, it's who ordered it and Dewitt Signed/wrote Civilian exclusion order No. 34 as per https://www.nps.gov/nr/twhp/wwwlps/lessons/89manzanar/89facts2a.htm is that not a reliable enough source? yes, FDR did allow the order but he didn't author it. Also, in what document/speech does it say they ordered the internment as the NPS did not specifically mention that? Dvorak4159 ( talk) 13:53, 22 January 2018 (UTC)
A couple of citations to Densho Encyclopedia are tagged as "Better source needed". Densho is an archive specializing in the internment of Japanese Americans, so I'm not sure what sources would be considered better. I'll remove the tags, but if anyone thinks they should stay then please undo my edit. Mcampany ( talk) 05:57, 31 January 2018 (UTC)Mcampany
There was a sentence in the article that used the phrase "Imperial Japan." True enough that Japan thought itself to be an empire, but for most of the world it was just plain old "Japan," and that's the way Wikipedia should have it, because we rely on English-language sources for usage. Check just about any source, and you will find that it was "Japan," with no modifier. I don't mind linking to "Empire of Japan"; that is entirely appropriate. Thanks! BeenAroundAWhile ( talk) 02:54, 2 February 2018 (UTC)
The Empire of Japan (1868-1947) did not only control the traditional Japanese islands. It annexed the Korean Peninsula, areas of China, and during World War II it was occupying large areas of both East Asia and Southeast Asia.
The article specifies that the internment orders were not only covering those of Japanese ancestry, but populations which were subjects to the Empire: "Korean-Americans and Taiwanese, classified as ethnically Japanese because both Korea and Taiwan were Japanese colonies at the time, were also included." Dimadick ( talk) 10:19, 2 February 2018 (UTC)
Simply saying "Japan" would be grossly and intentionally misleading, confusing modern "Japan" with the "Empire of Japan". We could easily say the "Imperial Japanese Navy". Vivexdino ( talk) 01:26, 15 February 2018 (UTC)
The photo in the section on education in the camps is partially captioned, "Flag of allegiance pledge." This makes no sense and is simply grammatically incorrect. It should be rewritten to read something like, "Pledge of allegiance to the flag," or simply, "Pledge of allegience." 2600:1700:4070:6240:714E:AA6B:73BC:7817 ( talk) 00:33, 20 February 2018 (UTC)
The section relating to the Department of Justice internment camps is written as if it were an editorial. Although it attempts objectivity, the section comes off as conveying a point of view. The problems start with the third paragraph and continue until the end. Lines like "your opinion of the facts", "one must wonder" and "This leaves one to guess", along with questions posed to the reader, need to be removed, and the entire section should probably be rewritten. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.84.107.194 ( talk) 04:32, 9 January 2014 (UTC)
This section doesn't really discuss the actual DOJ facilities, which also held German and Italian Americans and about 5,500 Issei and Kibei, but focuses almost exclusively on the deportation and confinement of Japanese from Latin America. I propose moving most of the current text to a new section called "Japanese Latin Americans," probably after the sections on Hawaii in "Exclusion, removal and detention," and reworking the "DOJ Internment Camps" section. Do these changes seem appropriate to others? MartinaDee ( talk) 01:21, 26 February 2014 (UTC)
```` — Preceding unsigned comment added by Starhistory22 ( talk • contribs) 20:58, 7 February 2014 (UTC)
Being Japanese ethnically made them enemies hmm. You know the funny thing is we cry out that these wars were fought for freedom meanwhile we talk about how it was ok to Jail 3rd or 4th gen American citizens because their ancestors came from a country that was at war with them 50 years or so later. We also Denied many Jews from landing here even though they were fleeing the Nazis. We also talk about the holocaust and how every sane human is shocked at how even children and babies could be massacred just because they were Jewish and yet ignore the Chinese massacres committed by the Japanese for "Security" and how American forces nuked children, and babies and pregnant women and mutated human beings. But you know we are the good guys. Also your point about how Japan treated it's foreign populations? IRRELEVANT American citizens whose ancestors left a nation a few generations ago are not responsible, if the nation from which your ancestor lies where to persecute conservatives, would we suddenly say ok well that means we have legitimacy to now persecute you. How , unless we went to war where-ever your ancestors are from and than say well we are afraid and our security requires your internment. I bet we would here some protests from you than. If you support the internment of people even third or fourth generation Americans simply for ancestor than you should have no problem having your territory taken away and your freedom taken away and being treated by everyone for the next 20 or so years as an enemy or subhuman as many Japanese-Americans felt. The reason it seems PC to you is simply because just like the holocaust, 95% of scholars are going to recognize it for what it is. An injustice. The rise of some pseudo-neo-conservative movement only does damage to itself. Many times things are labeled liberal or leftist bias on Wikipedia, when really it is for the most part supported by CONSERVATIVE or REPUBLICAN tradition scholars as having offended American rights. Ridiculous. It is actually right wing or conservative values that support American rights from a government encroaching on them or the constitution. Ridiculous. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.69.176.102 ( talk) 04:01, 29 October 2014 (UTC)
The total glossing over of the Niihau Incident in order to push a racist agenda is indicative of how hopelessly slanted Wikipedia is. I'm terribly disappointed. Not a word about Japanese American citizens trying to murder Hawaiian Americans in acts of war as traitors acting for the Japanese Emperor.
Fuck Wikipedia.
CitizenDaveS (
talk)
08:20, 1 April 2018 (UTC)
Based on information in Conn, et al, Guarding the United States and its Outposts, pp. 120-123, which I have cited, I've added information on the influence of the Roberts Commission report to this article, and to the articles on that report, the Western Defense Command, and Gen. John L. DeWitt. Information on the report's accusations of Japanese espionage was previously absent from these articles. RobDuch ( talk) 01:44, 17 June 2018 (UTC)
although the population of Japanese Americans in the eastern areas of the country was and is lower and there were no camps east of the Mississippi shouldnt they at least be mentioned in the context of world war 2? as far as I know no other article on Wikipedia says anything about Japanese Americans in the east during the war. Razorhawk4595 ( talk) 20:08, 14 February 2019 (UTC)
I think there is a statement in this article that's too ambiguous and in need of some clarification. Namely, this one:
Despite the incident, the Territorial Governor of Hawaii rejected calls for the mass internment of the Japanese Americans living there.
This doesn't clarify which territorial governor it was who was against the mass internment of Japanese Americans. There were two during the Presidency of Franklin D. Roosevelt: Joseph Poindexter and Ingram Stainback. So which of them is this sentence referring to? I honestly don't know, otherwise I would have clarified this myself. Maximajorian Viridio ( talk) 16:35, 14 February 2019 (UTC)
I clarified the statement, it was Joseph Poindexter Razorhawk4595 ( talk) 20:38, 14 February 2019 (UTC)
Moved from User talk:Reywas92, @ Gmatsuda::
Thanks for your thoughtful edits to the Tule Lake, Manzanar and probably other camp articles. Please note what you're trying to do—move that to the main article—has been tried several times before, only to have it watered down rather badly each time. I've found the duplication easier, even though duplication, on its face, makes little sense. -- Gmatsuda ( talk) 06:32, 18 March 2019 (UTC)
I fully support content on the use of the euphemism and RS discussion on more accuate terminology. I do not endorse having excessively long quotations, including copying from half of an article, or a long paraphrase masquerading as a quotation. This section needs to be rewritten to take the main arguments from the sources more concisely. Most of all, sections should not be copied and pasted across articles in general, especially not as a long overview that does not relate specifically to that camp. Reywas92 Talk 20:05, 18 March 2019 (UTC)
Is there any evidence of Japanese-Americans showing emporer worship through ceremonies at their temples on the auspicious days in the decades prior to World War 2? If you look at even modern Thai society and Thai-Americans in relation to their worship and fanatacism relating to its royals family, you might find it shows some connections to the way Japanese would have acted in that past period. Thai-Americans fit in well into America society but you will find that few are willing to publicly speak out agains the Thai royal family or Thai regime in power due to the fear of loss of access to Thailand and possible reprisals against their families. With the Thai royals allowing their most devoted supporters to commit human rights abuses in their name, there is little condemnation from the US Thai community which has around 400,00 members. Thais pay tribute to the abusive Thai royals at temples and Thai businesses in the US. They even have a monument to King Bhumiphol in Cambridge Massachusetts. I would find it very surprising that Japanese Americans in the 1930s and 40s would show condemnation of the Japanese emporer at that time. In fact, most probably went along with their community leaders and and temples and worshiped him and the royal institution. This is an area that should be investigated. My experience is with the Thai-American community so that's why I made the connection here. How did Japanese Americans hold the emporer at that time? A lack of evidence of condemnation from Japanese Americans is not apathy or disinterest by the way. It may well mean fear on their part or approval. 203.131.210.82 ( talk) 05:33, 1 April 2019 (UTC) 203.131.210.82 ( talk) 05:35, 1 April 2019 (UTC)
Some versions of this article claim that Roosevelt personally ordered all of these actions, when in reality his orders were very limited in nature and it was General DeWitt who planned and carried out the mass interments while abusing order 9066. DeWitt's actions should not be excluded from the summary, as it was his plan and he was in charge of carrying it out.
Blaming FDR for DeWitt's personal plans and actions is not accurate and honest because there is no evidence to show that FDR knew what DeWitt had in plan. The only evidence that FDR was involved are assumptions that DeWitt was honest with him when he showed FDR a presentation. There is no evidence to suggest FDR knew of DeWitts personal plans and his intent to abuse order 9066.
Nothing FDR ever ordered was even remotely similar to what DeWitt did, and DeWitt was solely responsible for abusing the authority granted to him in order 9066. -- — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:100a:b016:5bc7:9517:a1a:2383:76e3 ( talk • contribs)
Per WP:LENGTH, the article is too long and should be 1/4 to 1/2 the size. The guideline says "> 100 kB Almost certainly should be divided". Currently the article is at "221,018 bytes". I think that we should remove most of the quotations and other first party sorces and stick to WP:THIRDPARTYSOURCES especially when it comes to causes and justification. We can also shorten what is listed in the legacy and other sections. Remember Wikipedia is WP:NOTADIRECTORY. -- Iloilo Wanderer ( talk) 10:15, 19 March 2020 (UTC)
The lead introductory section is supposed to be concise summary of the article. MOS:LEAD says, "As a general rule of thumb, a lead section should contain no more than four well-composed paragraphs and be carefully sourced as appropriate." The current intro is 6 long wordy paragraphs. I do not have the time now but I will cut it down. Maybe to a single paragraph. Often will long articles the best is a short lead and then get straight to the article.-- Iloilo Wanderer ( talk) 10:08, 19 March 2020 (UTC)
Journalist Gus Russo has several pages discussing the systematic private profiteering at the expense of Japanese Americans following the attack on Pearl Harbor in his book, Supermob: How Sidney Korshak and His Criminal Associates Became America's Hidden Power Brokers (Bloomsbury, 2007). The book was reviewed in SFGate by Trey Popp, who writes: "Russo's chapter on the shameless plundering of the assets of imprisoned Japanese Americans during World War II, presided over by a bevy of Korshak's associates, is particularly stirring." The book was also reviewed in the Chicago Tribune by Hillel Levin, who writes: "[Jacob Arvey's] clout with the Truman administration put a protege in charge of property seized from German companies and interned Japanese-Americans. Russo documents how these West Coast assets were sold for a fraction of their value to silent mob partners and the young lawyers, Arvey accomplices, who served as their frontmen." Russo also mentions how the reparations paid to Japanese Americans in the 1980s amounted to probably pennies on the dollar. It might be good to work some of this material into the article but I will also leave a similar suggestion on the talk pages of related articles. -- Mox La Push ( talk) 09:34, 15 May 2020 (UTC)
Should the term 'concentration camp' really be used here? It has significant POV connotations. – Jadebenn ( talk · contribs · subpages) 06:59, 6 September 2020 (UTC)
This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available
on the course page. Student editor(s):
Dovosh2.
Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT ( talk) 00:42, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 19 August 2021 and 9 December 2021. Further details are available
on the course page. Student editor(s):
Papilio Charontis. Peer reviewers:
HandsomeSquidward311,
Jordanshie.
Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT ( talk) 23:06, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
This article begins with the heading After Pearl Harbor - also spelled Harbour. Full understanding of the Japanese relocation must begin with material years BEFORE Pearl Harbor. It begins in the British and American embassies to Japan. The concerns of those ambassadors caused a chain of events political, military, legal, and geographic. The conferring heads of Canada and the USA triggered communication between their militaries, also between the FBI and the Royal Canadian Mounted Police. The signal event in BOTH countries was the obligatory issuance of IDENTITY CARDS to residents of Japanese origin or descent. Each nation had plans on the books for dealing with "their Japs" - including potential intern camp sites - perhaps 2 years before December 1941. Finding this material now is not easy.
Missing from history, IMO, is mention of a fraternal organization called Sons of the Golden West. It existed from San Diego to Vancouver, and appealed mostly to police officers. It felt one of its social obligations was to address the "Yellow Peril" of Asian immigrants, who began arriving by 1850. It seems no coincidence that there are some similarities to the KKK. --Ed Chilton
That is the Native Sons of the Golden West. They were not like the KKK, and changed their minds on this issue after the war. Dedicated several schools, with plaques proclaiming “ Justice, Liberty, and Tolerance” Some before-and-after quotes could improve the article. 2600:1010:B05A:B6E3:4528:E122:2230:895A ( talk) 18:50, 21 May 2022 (UTC)
He was supposed to have objected to this, and got in a fight with Earl Warren about it, before FDR told him to be quiet. I see nothing about it here. Could we have more info on this? 2600:1010:B05A:B6E3:4528:E122:2230:895A ( talk) 18:53, 21 May 2022 (UTC)
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 22 August 2022 and 16 December 2022. Further details are available
on the course page. Student editor(s):
Ej2022 (
article contribs). Peer reviewers:
EZEKEATHAN.
— Assignment last updated by E Middle March ( talk) 13:29, 9 November 2022 (UTC)
I'd like to rename this page "Incarceration of Japanese Americans." Given the ongoing debate on this talk page about whether to use the language of "concentration camps," (which I, as a Jew, do by the way believe is appropriate to describe Japanese incarceration) modify the language to "incarceration camps," which is still more accurate than the euphemistic "internment camps."
As per these essays, the term internment is a historical euphemism that is not a legally appropriate description of the forced relocation and incarceration of Japanese Americans:
https://www.npr.org/sections/publiceditor/2012/02/10/146691773/euphemisms-concentration-camps-and-the-japanese-internment https://www.nps.gov/tule/learn/education/upload/RDaniels_euphemisms.pdf https://www.hawaiinewsnow.com/2021/04/13/internment-or-incarceration-why-words-matter-describe-japanese-american-wartime-experience/ https://www.npr.org/2018/12/26/636107892/some-japanese-americans-wrongfully-imprisoned-during-wwii-oppose-census-question https://www.npr.org/2019/07/05/739051933/this-isnt-the-first-time-americans-have-debated-what-to-call-detention-centers
With the move to a new title, it should be noted that the term internment has been used euphemistically. Likeanechointheforest ( talk) 19:05, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
From Wikipedia:
The Wikipedia article I have selected is about the internment of Japanese Americans, which was another racial attack to a minority group during the 20th century and mainly affected the West Coast, making it part of the history of California. The article is very well developed, as it is an extensive article with plenty of details and it is written very well. It breaks it down into sections and it includes details about who all was involved, when, where, and what happened after the internment of Japanese Americans. In addition, the article is written neutrally as it specifically provides facts, rather than the author’s opinion. Lastly, although the article is lengthy, the author provided over 130 references related to the information provided by in the article.
From your Ebook chapter:
The Ebook California : A History, chapter, “Discrimination and Accommodation,” page 187 makes emphasizes on the prosecution that minority groups were suffering and the attempts to stop it during the 20th century, which is now part of the history of the state of California. An example is the organization of Asiatic Exclusion League, a group against Asian minorities. This organization was responsible for discriminating Asian children, as they were not allowed in the same schools as Caucasians. — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
FeedurBrain (
talk •
contribs)
22:47, 17 November 2021 (UTC)
Would you consider changing it to Japanese American concentration camps? or World War II Japanese American Incarceration? I'm trying to think of alternatives that would address the concerns of the Japanese American community--the Japanese American Citizens League, Densho, the Japanese American National Museum, as well as leading scholars in the field (like Roger Daniels) state that the term internment is historically inaccurate, while the term concentration camps was historically used by FDR and members of his administration, and the idea will be more recognizable to an American audience as many members of the media already call them Japanese American concentration camps. Hcmaruyama ( talk) 18:37, 7 April 2022 (UTC)
I think calling them incarceration camps is more accurate than calling them concentration camps or internment camps. First of all, the definition of the term concentration camp is "a place which large numbers of people, especially political prisoners or members of persecuted minorities, are deliberately imprisoned in a relatively small area with inadequate facilities, sometimes to provide forced labour or mass executions". Japanese American camps easily stand out when compared to Nazi concentration camps, Ustaše-run concentration camps, or Italian concentration camps because nobody performed forced labour there or was systematically killed there. Also Unit 731 and Plantation complexes in the Southern United States meets the definition of concentration camps better than Japanese American camps. While I do agree that calling them "internment camps" is euphemistic, I think calling them "concentration camps" is dysphemistic. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.144.204.68 ( talk) 21:48, 1 June 2023 (UTC)