Alien Americans (1936)

This is based on chapter 11 of the book. That particular chapter dealt with The Japanese in California.

“THE gap in the labour supply caused by the exclusion of the Chinese in the eighties and nineties was filled by the Japanese. Over a half-million acres of farmland had been put out of cultivation. From Bakersfield to Redding, banks had mortgages on farmlands that could not be made productive. No wonder the Japanese were welcomed by the public press !”/P>

The book points out that, by kicking the Chinese out, a lot of farmland became unproductive, so, at first, the Japanese were welcomed since they could make the land productive. Most of the immigrants came from rural districts and knew how to farm the land.

“The opposition against the Japanese developed soon after they began to arrive in great numbers. The farm-owners found that the Japanese were not so easily controlled as the Chinese had been (1): they had all the vices of the latter and none of the virtues (2). Where the Chinese were docile, the Japanese were aggressive. They demanded better employment and housing conditions, violated contracts, struck when the strike would be most inopportune (3) for the farmer, and were eager to become land-owners. Farmers frequently were forced to lease or sell their ranches to the Japanese because the latter, having a monopoly on the farm labour in the community, employed that monopoly most effectively in bringing financial loss to farmers who resisted their demands (4). Soon the Japanese were virtually in control of the berry, potato, flower, and truck-garden markets in almost every community of any size. Another complaint was that they neglected the orchards and teams furnished them, and that the farms leased to them were permitted to deteriorate rapidly (5). In thinning vegetables, a process in which wages were paid by the thousand feet, they worked less carefully than the Mexicans in order to increase their earnings. If for that reason Mexican labour was preferred, the Japanese stirred up the Mexicans to work with as little care as they themselves did. Although the organization of Japanese labour under bosses was very convenient for the small rancher whose need for men varied greatly from week to week, this organization made the rancher entirely dependent on the bosses, who abused their power in many cases.”

(1)The Chinese, apparently, were considered okay since they could be “controlled.” Rather omnious phrasing of terms.

(2)The article reveals an anti-Japanese slant by this phraseology.

(3)Violating contracts and striking have been cited by other sources.

(4)This implies an actual planned attempt by the Japanese to ruin other farmers.

(5)If their farms went downhill so rapidly, then why were they so successful financially in raising crops on what had been very poor soil?

“In the cities the Japanese became small merchants, restaurant proprietors, laundrymen, domestics, and gardeners. They worked on railway section gangs and in mines and canneries. They were accused of maintaining sweat shops, of driving white female domestics out of employment, of forcing two hundred shoe-repair men away from San Francisco, of controlling all unskilled labour on the railroads, of cutting into the white laundry business, and of underbidding white building contractors from 20 to 26 per cent. In fact they did cut prices and wages, and thus aroused the antagonism of the merchant and working classes. The Japanese refused to remain in a special quarter of their own and were willing to pay excessively high prices or rentals for pieces of property in other sections. When they moved in, white families in the adjoining properties moved out; and the neighbourhood, invaded by persons against whom public opinion had turned, lost status. Property values were reduced, and the Japanese were frequently enabled to buy or rent buildings and residences on their own terms. These practices aroused the white landlords, who by various means attempted to prevent the Japanese from spreading into all parts of a city.”

A laundry-list of charges against the Japanese. Notice how they were supposed to remain only in certain areas, yet at the same time they were accused of failure to assimilate into American culture.

Anti-Japanese groups get organized

“The Western Central Labor Union in Seattle started the anti-Japanese movement (April 18, 1900). In California the first gun was fired, in San Francisco, when, on May 7, 1900, Dr. A. E. Ross at a meeting of the State and San Francisco Building Trades Councils criticized unrestricted immigration and labour's exposure to the competition of cheaply paid foreigners. At that time a conflict had broken out between organized labour and the employers. The labour forces organized the Union Labor Party, which was successful enough to win the election of November 1901, and to place its candidate in the mayor's office. Thus the Labor Party was in power at a time when Japanese immigration began vitally to affect the workingman. The opposition against the Japanese was further strengthened by the fact that the Chinese Exclusion Act was to expire in 1902. On November 22, 1901, a meeting was held at which were discussed : "Some Reasons for Chinese Exclusion," "Meat versus Rice," "American Manhood against Asiatic Coolieism, Which Shall Survive?" Not only the Chinese were attacked but also the Japanese. Although in the beginning it was emphasized that there was no prejudice against Orientals and that the motive was only an economic one, racial feelings were appealed to almost immediately. The "treacherous, sneaking, insidious, betraying and perfidious nature and characteristics of the Mongolian race" were emphasized, and the "skulking, meanly servile, and immoral" Mongolian immigrants were exposed. Japan's successes in the Russo-Japanese War and the warning by Kaiser William II of the "Yellow Peril" increased the apprehension in California. A real invasion of Japanese immigrants was anticipated as a result of the war. Meanwhile, in 1901, 5249 Japanese had arrived j 14,455 in 1902; 20,041 in 19035 and 14,382 in 1904.”

“The San Francisco Chronicle in February 1905 carried on a vigorous campaign against the "little yellow man," and the state legislature passed a resolution demanding of Congress that action be taken immediately to restrict the further immigration of Japanese labourers. A campaign was started in which boycotts of the Japanese and of merchants and manufacturers employing Japanese were urged. A Japanese exclusion society was organized and held an anti-Japanese convention on May 7, 1905.”

Then there was the Great San Francisco Earthquake of 1906.

“After the earthquake (1906) when municipal affairs were in a chaotic situation and law and order were not maintained assaults were made on Japanese residents. Japanese stores and restaurants were invaded, burglarized, and destroyed. Thousands of new immigrants had arrived, and, in an effort to find new homes and business locations, many Japanese who had been affected by the disaster invaded the western districts of San Francisco which hitherto had been "white man's land."

Notice that this section refers to violence against the Japanese, yet, at the same time, accuses them of invading the “white man's land” living area.

“With the plea, "White men and women, patronize your own race," a new alien Americans boycott was proclaimed.”

This was followed by boycotts of Japanese businesses and products. One source I read recently tried to say that none of what went on was racist, but notice the use of the terms “White men and women, patronize your own race.” That's about as racist as one can get.

The writer, though, seems to be trying to work on both sides of the fence at the same time, since he says that the problem with the school board, where Japanese students were placed in an all-Oriental school, was really an attempt by local politicians to distract the public from some corruption in the local government.

The Asiatic Exclusion League

“In February 1908 during a period in which relations between the United States and Japan were dangerously tense because of Manchuria the Central Labor Council of Seattle sponsored the first international convention of the Asiatic Exclusion League of North America, which had a membership in California alone of 110,OOO. By May 1909 the League consisted of 238 affiliated bodies, mainly labour organizations. In March 1908 an Anti-Japanese Laundry League was organized which attempted to prevent the issuance of licences to the Japanese, to reduce their patronage by skilfully appealing to race prejudice, and to prevent Japanese from securing laundry equipment.”

Actually, the group started out as the Japanese and Korean Exclusion League, but altered there name so they could include Hindus, Malays, and any other Asiatic grouping they didn't like.

Various Japanese associations were formed for protection, according to the writer, and were recognized by the Japanese government.

“The semi-official status given to the Japanese associations by their home government stamped them in the eyes of the public as tools of Japanese imperialism. Every Japanese was readily believed to be conniving with the Japanese Government for the ultimate destruction of America. This spectre made California pass the discriminatory land law of 1913, despite the opposition of President Wilson.”

In other words, it was the fault of the Japanese that the Americans had to try to keep them out, and it was there fault that they had formed organizations to protect them from the various anti-Japanese organizations that had come into being.

Blame the victim.

Yet more complaints against the Japanese

“Labour organizations, military and patriotic organizations (the American Coalition of Patriotic Societies with its affiliated societies), and retail merchants' organizations combined in their attack on the Japanese. The Japanese were undesirable aliens; cultural and biological assimilation was impossible. Their patriotic self conceit was an obstacle to amalgamation. Their low standard of living threatened the American workingman; their birth-rate was a danger to California as a white man's country. They introduced pagan cults into Christian America. Racial undesirability was emphasized, rather than racial inferiority. Ineligibility to citizenship was made the motivation for discrimination.”

In other words, since they were not eligible to become citizens, it was okay to discriminate against them, even though the rulings that made it impossible for them to become citizens were, themselves, results of discrimination.

So, discrimination became the motive for discrimination.

The writer does not some groups opposed to exclusion, and these included the Federal Council of Churches of Christ (exclusion would interfere with the work they were doing overseas), the California Fruit Growers, and the California Farmers Co-operative. The cannery business also opposed block Japanese fishermen from fishing.

Newspapers and Hatred

"Meanwhile, although virulent anti-Japanese sentiment has declined decidedly and is now more or less quiescent, the accounts in newspapers averse to the Japanese keep suspicion alive. As a matter of fact this form of propaganda does not create anti-Japanese sentiment; it plays on attitudes that already exist, and is primarily the expression of prevailing public opinion. However, at the same time an atmosphere of fear and hostility is worked up and perpetuated by the use of flaming headlines...”

The articles didn't create the anti-Japanese feeling, but they fueled the feelings that were already there, in other words.

Japanese Hurt Rural Areas

Of chief concern to whites is the crushing competition this class of people is giving to the white rural population. Nowadays it is in the rural regions that most of the outbursts of racial feeling occur, especially in districts where the pioneer code is not forgotten and the frontier spirit is not yet lost. Here signs are sometimes placed alongside the road warning the Japanese that this is a "white man's country," that "no Japs are wanted," and that "Japs better not have the sun set on them here."

Specific Cities

The author then talks about certain cities.

“In Los Angeles the Japanese do not live in a solid segregated area...”

“The businesses of Japanese in San Francisco, however, cater very largely to Japanese.”

This statement, though, has nothing to do with the previous one, although they follow each other in the article.

Fresno. The author divides the city into east and west, and “west of the tracks” is the area for foreigners. This section of the material had what I felt was a very interesting section:

“Vulgar white women display an arrogant, rude attitude when trading in the Japanese stores, but it is the Negroes who most openly exhibit a feeling of superiority to the Japanese.”

What that has to do with anything else the author talks about is something I can't figure out.

The author also spends some time talking about the difficulties between the first generation of Japanese immigrants and their children who, born in America, are American citizens and often want to live like the white culture does, thus turning their back on their Japanese traditions and families.

The author also notes that intermarriage with whites is prohibited to the Japanese.

(So, what is being set up is this: the anti-Japanese people say the Japanese don't assimilate, and therefore should be gotten rid of. Yet, the very same people discriminate against the Japanese immigrants, make sure they can't become citizens, block them from marrying whites, and, in general, do everything they can to make sure that the Japanese can't possibly assimilate, no matter how much the Nisei (second generation) might want to.)

(Reading this chapter, I'm not sure if the author is pro-Japanese, anti-Japanese, or is satisfied presenting what amounts to be a schizophrenic view of the Japanese in America.)



Main Index
Japan main page
Japanese-American Internment Camps index page
Japan and World War II index page