From the beginning of the Twentieth Century, there have been quite a number of watershed
events in American as well as World History. The term “watershed” refers to a turning point
in history. Examples are the Great Depression in the 1930s, World War Two in the 1940s,
the Cold War beginning in the 1950s, the Civil Rights Movements in the US (and Third World
Liberation Movements, their international counterparts) beginning in the 1960s, the downfall
of communism and the rise of terrorism in the 1980s, and 9/11 in 2001. Those watersheds
have had political, social and economic consequences on different groups and in different
spheres, ranging from local to global dimensions.
Japanese Americans and their position in American society were effected by all those
watershed events. Western Colonialism in Asia envisioned the Japanese as the primitive
“Other” of the modern United States1. After having opened Japan by force in 1853, the US
welcomed Japanese immigrants for a short time as a cheap source of labor. Long before the
Great Depression hit the United States, however, anti-Japanese American sentiment, which
was due to racial hatred and supposed economic competition, grew bigger and bigger,
culminating in the Oriental Exclusion Act of 1924. During the Second World War, Japanese
Americans residing primarily on the West Coast were put into internment camps. Dubbed a
“military necessity,” this internment of approximately 110.000 persons of Japanese ancestry,
a majority of whom were American citizens, was, in reality, solely triggered by racial hatred.
In the 1950s, during the Cold War, Japan, as Asia’s only democracy, switched roles with
Communist China and became an ally of the United States. This had immediate
consequences on the attitude towards Japanese Americans in the US. The Civil Rights Movement and the Third World Liberation Movements were closely linked to the Cold War in
that of all the anti-communist countries, the United States was the only one which had not
been economically ruined by the preceding war. Thus, the United States was expected to be
the guardian of democracy and had to live up to its proclaimed ideals of equality and
freedom. The Cold War and the Civil Rights Movement gave Asian Americans in general,
and Japanese Americans in particular, unprecedented opportunities, such as electoral
empowerment, the repeal of exclusion laws, and to a certain extent social mobility. [...]
Table of Contents
I Introduction
II Main Part
A Racial Formation Theory (Omi & Winant)
B Hawai'i
1. Japanese Americans in Hawai'i 1950s – 1990s
2. Hawai'i 1950s – 1990s
a. The Fifties
b. The Sixties
c. The Seventies
d. The Eighties
e. The Nineties
3. Politically Active Groups in Hawai'i
a. Democrats
b. Republicans
c. The Labor Movement / The Communist Party
d. Native Hawaiians
4. Racial Formation and Japanese American Positionality in Hawai'i
C Mainland United States
1. Japanese Americans on the Mainland
2. Development of the Japanese American Community 1950s – 1990s
3. Key Groups on the Mainland
a. Japanese American Citizens League (JACL)
b. The Asian American Movement
4. Japanese Americans Ambiguous Social and Economic Position
5. Major Themes
a. The “Model Minority” Myth
b. Redress and Conam Nobis Cases
6. Racial Formation and Japanese American Positionality on the Mainland
III Conclusion
IV Closing Remarks
Research Objectives and Core Themes
This paper provides a comparative analysis of the political positionality of Japanese Americans in Hawai'i and the mainland United States from the 1950s to the 1990s, applying Omi and Winant's Racial Formation Theory to explain the divergent paths of integration and political influence in these two distinct environments.
- Comparative analysis of political influence in Hawai'i versus the mainland.
- Application of Racial Formation Theory to historical group development.
- The impact of the "Model Minority" myth on social and political positioning.
- Structural differences in labor movements and political party representation.
- The influence of international politics (Cold War) on local racial dynamics.
Excerpt from the Book
A Racial Formation Theory (Omi & Winant)
Michael Omi, currently an associate professor in the Ethnic Studies Department at the University of California, Berkeley, and Howard Winant, who presently teaches in the Sociology Department at Temple University, published their first edition of Racial Formation in the United States in 1986. Over a period of about three decades, they had witnessed an ebb and flow in the politics of race and concluded that the definitions of the concept of race prevailing at the time were inadequate.
In the 1960s, the Civil Rights Movement brought race to everyone’s attention and contested its very meaning. In the 1970s, conflicts receded as reforms were gradually institutionalized. Finally, in the 1980s, these very reforms were attacked by the government. According to Omi and Winant, neither the left, center or right views on race were correct, nor those of the New Right and Neo-Conservatives. The Left had only romanticized illusions about race, whereas the Center and Right retreated into a kind of reductionism, abandoning democratic and egalitarian ideals of race. The New Right exercised subtextual race baiting, while the Neo-Conservative racial doctrine theoretically endorsed but practically abandoned equality.
Furthermore, the two scholars observed that, for mainstream society, race is a problem of policy, social engineering, and state management, submerging into other social relations. In other words, ignoring the immediate US context, the powers of the intellect, i.e. art, religion, science, and politics, are used to explain racial distinctions and to suggest how they may be maintained, changed, or abolished.
Summary of Chapters
A Racial Formation Theory (Omi & Winant): Outlines the core theoretical framework, defining race as a historically flexible social construct that is constantly transformed by political struggle.
Hawai'i: Examines the unique upward mobility of Japanese Americans in the islands, their transition from manual laborers to a dominant political hegemony, and their interactions with Native Hawaiian movements.
Mainland United States: Analyzes the Japanese American experience as an ethnic minority, focusing on their struggle for civil rights, the influence of organizations like the JACL, and their often ambiguous social and economic status.
Conclusion: Summarizes the key finding that while Japanese Americans in Hawai'i achieved a level of political hegemony, mainland Japanese Americans utilized legislative and legal channels due to their lack of majority power.
Closing Remarks: Reflects on the limitations of the analysis, noting the complexity of individuality, hybridity, and multiplicity within the Japanese American community that transcends simple racial definitions.
Keywords
Racial Formation Theory, Japanese Americans, Hawai'i, Mainland US, Political Positionality, Hegemony, Civil Rights Movement, Model Minority, JACL, Asian American Movement, Redress Movement, Assimilation, Social Construct, Ethnicity, Political Power
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the primary focus of this research paper?
The paper examines the differing political and social trajectories of Japanese Americans in Hawai'i compared to the mainland United States from the 1950s to the 1990s.
What are the central themes addressed in the work?
Key themes include political hegemony, the impact of the Cold War and Civil Rights Movement, the "Model Minority" myth, and the divergent strategies used by ethnic organizations.
What is the main research question or objective?
The objective is to compare how two populations with identical initial formal conditions developed distinct political standings based on their specific environments using Racial Formation Theory.
Which scientific methodology is utilized?
The study employs a comparative historical analysis, utilizing Omi and Winant's Racial Formation Theory as a lens to interpret socio-political developments.
What does the main body of the work cover?
The main body details the historical evolution of Japanese American influence in Hawai'i, the rise of the Democratic Party there, and contrasts this with the mainland experience involving the JACL and various activist movements.
Which keywords characterize the work?
The core keywords include Racial Formation Theory, hegemony, political positionality, Japanese American history, and comparative ethnic studies.
How did the 1954 Democratic Revolution in Hawai'i impact Japanese Americans?
It allowed them to leverage their educational gains and veterans' status to shift from a marginalized group to a dominant political force within the Democratic Party structure.
Why does the author argue that the "Model Minority" myth is harmful?
The author argues it is a distorted, passive image that obscures the internal diversity of the community and is used politically to pit Asian Americans against other less "successful" minority groups.
What is the significance of the "Redress and Conam Nobis" cases?
These cases represent a shift from purely political lobbying to successful legal battles that eventually acknowledged the injustice of wartime internment and the reversal of past Supreme Court decisions.
- Quote paper
- B.A. Stephanie Wössner (Author), 2002, Japanese American Positionality in Hawaii and on the mainland, Munich, GRIN Verlag, https://www.grin.com/document/138129
