The Making of Asian America: A History

Nonfiction | Book | Adult | Published in 2015

A modern alternative to SparkNotes and CliffsNotes, SuperSummary offers high-quality Study Guides with detailed chapter summaries and analysis of major themes, characters, and more.

Download PDF

Summary

Background

Chapter Summaries & Analyses

Introduction, Part 1, Chapters 1-2

Part 2, Chapters 3-4

Part 2, Chapters 5-6

Part 2, Chapters 7-9

Part 3, Chapters 10-12

Part 4, Chapters 13-14

Part 4, Chapters 15-16

Part 5, Chapter 17-Epilogue

Key Figures

Themes

Index of Terms

Important Quotes

Essay Topics

Part 3, Chapters 10-12Chapter Summaries & Analyses

Part 3: “Asian America in a World at War”

Chapter 10 Summary: “‘Military Necessity’: The Uprooting of Japanese Americans During World War II”

After Japan’s Pearl Harbor attack on December 7, 1941, the United States officially entered World War II. The attack also led to the classification of first-generation Japanese Americans as “enemy aliens” and the imprisonment of first- and second-generation Japanese Americans in concentration camps throughout the United States (211). In Canada and the US, the majority of Japanese Americans lived on the Pacific Coast in British Columbia, Washington, Oregon, and California. An estimated 120,000 Japanese residing in the US, two-thirds of whom were citizens, were uprooted, while 23,000 Japanese Canadians faced the same fate. The measure was deemed a “military necessity” (211).

Japanese Latin Americans were arrested in Peru and transported to the US for the same purpose. Overall, “Japanese Americans, Canadians, and Latin Americans were not individually charged with acts of treachery or subversion, but were instead sentenced as a group for incarceration during the war in the name of national and hemispheric security” on racial grounds (212). Nineteen Americans arrested for “serving as agents of Japan” were all white (212). In contrast, the majority of Japanese Americans, per government reports, were “overwhelmingly loyal to the United States” (212).

Nonetheless, the existing US legal framework, such as the 1940 Alien Registration Act, facilitated their incarceration. In Canada, questions of Japanese Canadian loyalty spurred investigations as early as 1921. The two North American countries already “began to strengthen the strategic alliance” in 1937, which included discussing the “problem” of Japanese residents at the Canada-US Permanent Joint Board of Defense (213). Similarly, the 1938 “Declaration of Lima” targeted Nazi Germany but also “laid the groundwork for Latin American cooperation in the deportation and incarceration of Japanese Peruvians during the war” (214).

In the US government, calls to deal with the Japanese “problem” from high-ranking officials, such as the Secretary of the Navy Frank Knox and Lieutenant General John L. DeWitt, had far-reaching consequences. Despite lacking evidence, DeWitt argued that “the very fact that no sabotage has taken place to date is a disturbing and confirming indication that such action will be taken” (217). Racism and systemic discrimination made such views popular. Similarly, within the War Department, dissenting views opposing the mass removal of the Japanese Americans, such as that of Attorney General Biddle or Secretary of War Henry Stimson, eventually lessened. In early 1942, the US government identified 88 military zones from which “enemy aliens” had to relocate within 26 days. Their cultural organizations and schools were closed.

The incarceration of Japanese Latin Americans in the US was motivated by several factors. They ranged from the US finding their Latin American counterparts ineffective to the “desire to obtain enough Japanese nationals to use as potential hostage exchanges for US citizens captured in Japan” (224). In addition to Peru, 11 other Latin American countries, including El Salvador, Costa Rica, Nicaragua, and Columbia, “deported Axis nationals to the United States” (227). Overall, the experiences of Japanese living in the Americas “varied widely” during World War II (227). For instance, Argentina and Chile did not incarcerate their Japanese residents.

Chapter 11 Summary: “‘Grave Injustices’: The Incarceration of Japanese Americans During World War II”

President Franklin D. Roosevelt’s Executive Order 9066 signed in February 1942 allowed for the mass relocation of Japanese American from the so-called exclusion zones on the West Coast and their ultimate imprisonment in concentration camps. Japanese Americans had approximately one week to get themselves ready and were only allowed to take what they could carry. War Relocation Authority (WRA) carried out mass evictions.

Japanese Americans were first housed in 16 temporary “assembly centers” with “appalling” conditions that ranged from inadequate nutrition to barren, cramped housing with communal bathrooms and dining (232). Family units typically stayed together. Then, Japanese Americans were transferred to 10 concentration camps built by the War Relocation Authority located in inhospitable climates in Colorado, Arizona, Wyoming, Arkansas, California, Idaho, and Utah. For instance, “Manzanar, Poston, and six other sites were built in the desert” with extreme temperature fluctuations (236).

The majority complied. However, some, like Minoru Yasui, Gordon Hirabayashi, and Fred Korematsu, “challenged the constitutionality of Executive Order 9066” (234). Yasui was imprisoned in Minidoka camp following his conviction and spent almost a year in solitary confinement. Hirabayashi was convicted of disobeying the curfews—a ruling later confirmed by the Supreme Court. Korematsu was taken to the Topaz camp after a federal district court found him guilty of defying military orders in late 1942. Yet by late 1944, Ex parte Mitsuye Endo Supreme Court ruling decided that the US government could no longer detain loyal citizens.

WRA provided basic necessities in the camps. The incarcerated worked for wages that were far too low. Schools and recreation provided a break from a life filled with “monotony, anxiety, and growing discontent” (237). Manzanar and Poston camps occasionally erupted in violence. Tule Lake experienced atrocities such as severely beating the “disloyal” strikers who demanded safer working conditions (240). Questions 27 about serving in the US armed forces and 28 about “unqualified allegiance to the United States of America” of a government questionnaire caused concern and anxiety (238).

At Tule Lake, 5,500 Japanese Americans renounced their citizenship, some of whom were sent to Japan. Most regretted the decision. However, it was not until 1959 that the decision was reversed for those who reapplied. More than 900 Japanese Peruvians were also sent to Japan, with only a small percentage being allowed to return to Peru. Civil liberties attorneys like A. L. Wirin and Wayne Collins worked to help the Japanese Peruvians.

Some second-generation Japanese Americans resisted the draft, demanding that their civil rights be restored before complying. Pardoned in 1947, it took decades for their peaceful protest to be recognized. Others, like the segregated Japanese American 100th Infantry Battalion and 442nd Regimental Combat Team, fought in Europe. Their participation in some of the bloodiest campaigns on the Western Allied side earned the 442nd the title of the most decorated unit in American history, while the 100th was called the “Purple Heart Battalion” (242).

After the camps were closed by early 1946, the US government attempted to disperse the Japanese American population more evenly throughout the US, “The idea was that […] the reestablishment of large, concentrated communities was unwise and detrimental to the group’s ongoing rehabilitation and reentry into mainstream society” (245). Many, however, returned to their original places of residence on the West Coast. Only in 1952 were the first-generation Japanese Americans allowed to naturalize as US citizens.

Chapter 12 Summary: “Good War, Cold War”

For some Asian Americans, the Second World War was a “good war” because it “opened new opportunities to participate in the American economy, military, and society” (252). Koreans, Filipinos, Chinese, and South Asians began to be portrayed as the “good Asians” in contrast to the Japanese, since their home countries were on the Allied side (252). By the 1960s, the term “model minorities” was being applied to some Asian Americans (253). At the same time, the Cold War brought with it the rivalry between the United States and the Soviet Union. The Soviet Union highlighted the racism within the US, which negatively impacted its image abroad. As a result, the US focused on diminishing the racial divide.

After Japan attacked China and the Second Sino-Japanese War began in 1937, China and the US were explicitly on the same side. American media published racist guidelines about differentiating the Chinese (friends) from the Japanese (enemies). Being on the same side benefitted the treatment of Chinese Americans, as did the goodwill tour by General Chiang Kai-shek’s wife throughout the country. The 1943 Magnuson Act ended Chinese exclusion. Immigration quotas remained, but Chinese Americans were now eligible for naturalization.

Similarly, the “Fighting Filipinos” image arose after the American loss in the 1942 Battle of Bataan, in which the Americans fought alongside the Filipinos against the invading Japanese (258). Public attitudes toward the Filipinos also improved. The 1946 Luce-Celler Act allowed Filipinos and another ally, the Indians, to naturalize as citizens and increased their immigration quotas. Larger numbers of Chinese and Filipino women began to arrive in the US after World War II. India’s immigration quota did not increase significantly until 1965.

During World War II, Korean Americans were in a precarious situation as Japanese subjects because their country was Japan’s colony. They fought against the “enemy alien” classification which “rightly enraged Koreans” (261). Lobbying eventually led to the unfreezing of their bank accounts but their classification remained until the end of martial law in Hawaii. In the wake of World War II, Korea was divided along the 38th parallel. This division between the two Koreas remained intact after the Korean War (1950-1953). Korean military brides and adoptees represented a new group of immigrants in the US The 1952 McCarran-Walter Act repealed the Asiatic Barred Zone and “abolished race as a criterion for naturalized citizenship” (271).

Japan remained under formal American occupation until 1952, using the broad powers of the Supreme Commander of the Allied Powers, Douglas MacArthur, to transform the country into a “free market democracy that served as an effective bulwark against the communist threat growing in the region” (263). Domestically, the Japanese looked down on intermarriages between Japanese women and Americans. Assimilating Japanese women into US society became “an important mission” (265). Some, however, “felt like strangers in their new homes” (266). In contrast, in the US view, the 1949 Chinese Revolution dashed its hopes of adopting the American way. China’s support for North Korea in the Korean War also jeopardized the Chinese Americans’ status as “patriotic Americans” (276). Some were subject to the anticommunist campaign.

Chapters 10-12 Analysis

The author dedicates two chapters to the forced removal and imprisonment of Japanese Americans on racial grounds during World War II because it is arguably the nadir for Asian Americans' treatment in the 19th-20th century. A portion of the text features narrative history. After all, their plight was so shocking that it speaks for itself. Lee also focuses on The Impact of Immigration Law on Asian Americans theme in this context. She examines both the immigration legislation, the legal Pan-American cooperation, and the relevant Supreme Court cases. The author also analyzes other Asian American groups in the context of the Second World War and the Cold War. Empire, Colonialism, and Asian Immigration and the related theme of The Impact of Immigration Law on Asian Americans are relevant here.

The Impact of Immigration Law on Asian Americans features prominently in the case of Japanese Americans in several ways. First, Lee shows a direct relationship between societal attitudes, systemic racism, and the collective punishment of Japanese Americans. Since 1924, the Japanese in the US were both excluded from immigrating and from naturalizing as citizens. The 1940 Alien Registration Act allowed the US government to exert greater control over first-generation Japanese immigrants. Finally, the 1942 Executive Order 9066 initiated their forced removal and imprisonment as a “military necessity.” However, Italian and German Americans were not targeted on such a massive scale despite their perceived links with the other Axis powers.

Second, the US continued to lead the way in establishing Pan-American networks in immigration control. The 1937 Canada-US Permanent Joint Board of Defense foresaw the Japanese “problem,” and, during the war, Canada similarly imprisoned its own Japanese population. The 1938 “Declaration of Lima” established the framework for “Latin American cooperation in the deportation and incarceration of Japanese Peruvians during the war” (214).

Third, the Supreme Court cases of US citizens of Japanese descent, Gordon Hirabayashi and Fred Korematsu, failed to overturn their convictions challenging EO 9066. However, they set important precedents for civil rights. In turn, the 1944 Ex parte Mitsuye Endo Supreme Court case was more immediately impactful since it established that loyal Japanese Americans could no longer be detained. Overall, Japanese American citizens were viewed as not quite “American” and were associated with their ancestral homeland. The other Asian American groups were viewed in the same way.

However, World War II benefitted the Chinese, Filipinos, and South Asians because their ancestral homelands fought on the side of the Allies. The legislation that arose out of World War II ended Chinese exclusion through the 1943 Magnuson Act and allowed for Filipino and South Asian naturalization through the 1946 Luce-Celler Act. Overall, World War II served as a watershed moment and led US immigration law in a positive direction.

However, this vulnerability to the changing relationship between the US and Asian countries continued to impact Asian Americans. The Empire, Colonialism, and Asian Immigration theme and the related topic of The Impact of Immigration Law on Asian Americans both demonstrate this vulnerability. First, the positive attitude toward Chinese Americans during World War II ended as soon as the Chinese Revolution of 1949, because China adopted an ideology that the US viewed as hostile. The Philippines received formal independence but maintained an unequal relationship with the US. For the Koreans, the results of the war were mixed. They stopped being Japanese colonial subjects after three decades of Japanese imperialism.

Koreans found themselves dominated by more powerful forces and were caught at the center of the Cold War during the Korean War (1950-1953), as the US supported the south, while the Soviet Union and China supported the north. Japan remained formally occupied by the US until 1952. At this time, the Supreme Commander of the Allied Powers, Douglas MacArthur, exerted tremendous personal power over the islands in a quest to mold them into a democracy. The Americans perceived the Japanese paternalistically, as they had once viewed the Philippines: incapable of transforming themselves without American help. Historians like John Dower highlight the attitude of racial superiority with which the Americans treated the vanquished Japanese.

Finally, the author writes that “Soviet propaganda” used racial discrimination in the US “to tarnish America’s image abroad” (252). However, racial discrimination within the US was real with or without Soviet commentary. Its damaged image abroad in this regard also pushed the US to gradually improve its treatment of marginalized immigrant communities at home. In general, American foreign policy significantly shaped the Asian American experience during the Cold War.