Interesting Read... Options

[Blakjak]

Anybody read Thomas Frank's What's the Matter with Kansas? I'm about halfway through it now and I find it very interesting. Druid you're from Kansas right lol. No, but it really is a thought-provoking read, something I think everyone should try and muscle their way through.

*I know this isn't about the War on Terror but it deals with politics so I thought it would be relevant.

This post has been edited by Blakjak: 06/27/05 4:55pm

[Frosty]

Come on, don't alter the context so drastically. I am talking about a time of war and abnormal civil unrest. I am also talking about something temporary, not something permanent. I have read enough about the Japanese internment camps to know that living there was a much less than pleasant experience; I was merely making the point that during those times, had the camps been more habitable, they may have been somewhat protective for the people there.

That's a far different scenario than just arbitrarily rounding up blacks and shipping them off to Alaska to reduce normal crime levels. However, if a legitimate race war broke out, then it may not be a bad idea to somehow separate the two groups. In that situation, internment would probably not be ideal, but relocation of one or both may be better than allowing a race war to be fought. Freedom is to be held in the highest respect, of course, but it is the purpose of the State to pass laws to ensure the security of the people.

I think at the time of WWII, internment was probably the best they could do, although it may have been possible to improve the living conditions quite a bit. I will not say that the Japanese were not wronged, but I will also not say that their internment was 100% bad. It may very well have saved many more lives than it cost. (Sounds kind of like the argument for dropping the atomic bomb(s).... Too bad they were dropped in heavily civilian-populated areas, otherwise it may not have been so problematic)

[holden_caulfield]

Freedom is to be held in the highest respect, of course, but it is the purpose of the State to pass laws to ensure the security of the people.

Japanese-Americans ARE the people. And I think we can agree that Roosevelt didn't have them interned for their own protection. The ultimate purpose of the State is not to "pass laws to ensure the security of the people." As stated in the preamble, the purpose of the government is "to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity." What Roosevelt did failed in all these respects, and don't come back telling me how moving the Japanese somehow reduced espionage or discouraged anti-American sentiments.

It's not just that they were relocated, they lost most of their shit too--homes, clothes, sentimental posessions, PS2s, you name it. Somehow, I don't think it's the government's business to round up American citizens, trample their rights, and relocate them to separate but less than equal facilities in the name of justice, freedom, and... racial harmony(?). Please.

It's funny how, on the one hand, Japanese-Americans could not be trusted to live as loyal US citizens (or whatever other BS excuse that could be furnished), yet somehow it was ok to arm their children, train them, and then send them to fight Nazis: the 442nd Regimental Combat Team was one of the most highly decorated and honored American units to ever serve, exemplifying true love for one's country--even if that country is fucking your family over hardcore.

Smells like consummate hypocrisy to me.

--

[Frosty]

It's funny how, on the one hand, Japanese-Americans could not be trusted to live as loyal US citizens (or whatever other BS excuse that could be furnished), yet somehow it was ok to arm their children, train them, and then send them to fight Nazis: the 442nd Regimental Combat Team was one of the most highly decorated and honored American units to ever serve, exemplifying true love for one's country--even if that country is fucking your family over hardcore.

Very true. I'm not arguing that the specifics of the Japanese-American internment were good; nor am I arguing that the government's motives in that case were pure, but I am saying that it may have saved lives. Note the use of the subjunctive.

I am sure the government had their reasons for doing what they did. I doubt that it was primarily prejudice in the case of the Germans and Italians (due to the fact that they are also "Western" and more understandable to the average American), although it may have been for the Japanese (as an "Eastern" people, whose customs are far different than those of the average American).