5 ms·

First, the article doesn't discuss 'whiteness', so your comment is something of an irrelevant narrative imposition. Second, it's intellectually dishonest to im

First, the article doesn't discuss 'whiteness', so your comment is something of an irrelevant narrative imposition. Second, it's intellectually dishonest to imply that this had anything to do with a malleable concept of race. Italy and the US were at war during WW2, and the additional scrutiny was very clearly based upon ancestral nationality, rather than ethnic, lines.

burkaman 10y ago
Obviously the war is a big part of this, but the article makes it clear that wasn't the only factor. Right near the beginning: > Italian-Americans had faced prejudice for decades by the time the order was drafted, says Guglielmo. Italians were the biggest group of immigrants to the United States who passed through Ellis Island for much of the late 19th and early 20th century; between 1876 and 1930, 5 million Italians moved to the U.S. Not without backlash: By the 1920s, pseudo-scientists and polemicists in the 1920s popularized the notion that Italians were a separate race from Anglo-Americans.
KirinDave 10y ago
> First, the article doesn't discuss 'whiteness', so your comment is something of an irrelevant narrative imposition. It discusses "outsider" status, and WW2 represented a massive debate about who was "trustworthy." Historians have pointed out that in many cases these camp approaches were in part appeasement tactics for the rather large fascist movements growing in America. Hell, WW2 was the mark of the last unsuccessful kleptocrat-fascist coup against America lead by the leadership of Chase Manhattan bank in concert with the actual German nazis. It nearly happened, too! "Whiteness" is A Word for it that fascists don't like, in part because it speaks to their "white homeland" ideology. I rather enjoy using it to point out the other side of what they're polishing is in fact a turd. > Second, it's intellectually dishonest to imply that this had anything to do with a malleable concept of race. Italy and the US were at war during WW2, AND YET! Mysteriously! Japanese were specifically targeted for the harshest treatment, Italians the second most, and the fewest German Americans ended up in concentration camps. What's more, it "wasn't about race" but the principle tie for many of these people to these camps was their heritage and if their looks conformed to a stereotype! Like you yourself said: > and the additional scrutiny was very clearly based upon ancestral nationality, rather than ethnic, lines. Honestly, what the hell do YOU think this means? If someone looked the part, as defined by their "ancestral heritage" they had their property seized and their entire families put into war-crime level imprisonment. And you're going to say, "This isn't about race, it's about ancestral heritage." This just in: That's one of the primary components of race and the racist discourse in America. How many times did we see the Trump campaign supporters point out that if only 3rd greater generation Americans voted, the RNC would win the presidency every time? You are eager to call it "intellectually dishonest" and maybe that'll work in your christian-sponsored micro-targetted facebook ads and now-banned subreddits. For everyone not looking for an enemy to blame it's the observable and objective facts. None of the concentration camps America set up were fun places, but the ones for the least white-looking people were objectively horrifying, and the seizure of property against that class of people was much more widespread and damaging. More asian-looking people were dissipated than every other category combined.
- true_religion 10y ago
  > AND YET! Mysteriously! Japanese were specifically targeted for the harshest treatment, Italians the second most, and the fewest German Americans ended up in concentration camps. Practically speaking, it would be difficult to round up all German-Americans and put them into concentration camps in WW2. They had basically interbred with other people with dissimilar European ancestry, did not retain any unique accent, or group themselves into ethnic communes. Additionally, many believed that by fighting against Germany in World War 1, all German-American's had proved their loyalty beyond any more doubt. Lastly, Germany had its greatest waves of immigration to the America's either before the US was even a nation, or during its infancy. Italians were a 'new' wave of immigration, pushed into ghettos due to existing social bigotry, and easily differentiated from the normal phenotypic blend of older immigrant populations that became the white American norm. ---- Personally, I believe that this is better stated as ethnic discrimination. In Europe, Africa, and Asia---all 'old world' continents---there is less of a tendency to trumpet ones own race. Rather people have the view that their ethnicity is the best, their bloodline lineage is the best, their family heritage is the best. Discrimination there takes the form of Germany believing that anyone who isn't german is low-class---which includes Spaniards, Italians, British, Russians, Poles, Finns, etc. In the US today, ethnicity has been de-emphasized with a greater focus being put on race and religion, which is to our detriment in understanding both historical treatment of immigrants, and also current day treatment of immigrants. For example: why are so many people against Syrians, but view Saudi's as tolerable? Why is Yemen seen less favourable than Oman?
  - KirinDave 10y ago
    > Additionally, many believed that by fighting against Germany in World War 1, all German-American's had proved their loyalty beyond any more doubt. I'd love to see a source for this. My research and interviewing my relatives who were there suggested that they were quite concerned that the germans were "hard to spot". > Italians were a 'new' wave of immigration, pushed into ghettos due to existing social bigotry, and easily differentiated from the normal phenotypic blend of older immigrant populations that became the white American norm. I mean it wasn't _that_ new. There was a major wave of immigration in 1910. But bigotry based on appearance is almost always the basis of this.
tptacek 10y ago
Your argument fails, because Italians obviously weren't the only ethnicity now considered "white" and formerly considered not. The US has never been at war with Ireland, but white America's rejection of the Irish is so well-known it forms the basis for one of the most famous Simpsons jokes.
anigbrowl 10y ago
First, the article doesn't discuss 'whiteness' Your argument is basically that if the word doesn't appear in the original article, we should be able to hold a discussion of that concept that refers to the article. There is a lot more to reading comprehension than iterating over a bag of words to see whether they appear in a given corpus.

burkaman 10y ago

Obviously the war is a big part of this, but the article makes it clear that wasn't the only factor. Right near the beginning: > Italian-Americans had faced prejudice for decades by the time the order was drafted, says Guglielmo. Italians were the biggest group of immigrants to the United States who passed through Ellis Island for much of the late 19th and early 20th century; between 1876 and 1930, 5 million Italians moved to the U.S. Not without backlash: By the 1920s, pseudo-scientists and polemicists in the 1920s popularized the notion that Italians were a separate race from Anglo-Americans.

KirinDave 10y ago

> First, the article doesn't discuss 'whiteness', so your comment is something of an irrelevant narrative imposition. It discusses "outsider" status, and WW2 represented a massive debate about who was "trustworthy." Historians have pointed out that in many cases these camp approaches were in part appeasement tactics for the rather large fascist movements growing in America. Hell, WW2 was the mark of the last unsuccessful kleptocrat-fascist coup against America lead by the leadership of Chase Manhattan bank in concert with the actual German nazis. It nearly happened, too! "Whiteness" is A Word for it that fascists don't like, in part because it speaks to their "white homeland" ideology. I rather enjoy using it to point out the other side of what they're polishing is in fact a turd. > Second, it's intellectually dishonest to imply that this had anything to do with a malleable concept of race. Italy and the US were at war during WW2, AND YET! Mysteriously! Japanese were specifically targeted for the harshest treatment, Italians the second most, and the fewest German Americans ended up in concentration camps. What's more, it "wasn't about race" but the principle tie for many of these people to these camps was their heritage and if their looks conformed to a stereotype! Like you yourself said: > and the additional scrutiny was very clearly based upon ancestral nationality, rather than ethnic, lines. Honestly, what the hell do YOU think this means? If someone looked the part, as defined by their "ancestral heritage" they had their property seized and their entire families put into war-crime level imprisonment. And you're going to say, "This isn't about race, it's about ancestral heritage." This just in: That's one of the primary components of race and the racist discourse in America. How many times did we see the Trump campaign supporters point out that if only 3rd greater generation Americans voted, the RNC would win the presidency every time? You are eager to call it "intellectually dishonest" and maybe that'll work in your christian-sponsored micro-targetted facebook ads and now-banned subreddits. For everyone not looking for an enemy to blame it's the observable and objective facts. None of the concentration camps America set up were fun places, but the ones for the least white-looking people were objectively horrifying, and the seizure of property against that class of people was much more widespread and damaging. More asian-looking people were dissipated than every other category combined.

true_religion 10y ago
> AND YET! Mysteriously! Japanese were specifically targeted for the harshest treatment, Italians the second most, and the fewest German Americans ended up in concentration camps. Practically speaking, it would be difficult to round up all German-Americans and put them into concentration camps in WW2. They had basically interbred with other people with dissimilar European ancestry, did not retain any unique accent, or group themselves into ethnic communes. Additionally, many believed that by fighting against Germany in World War 1, all German-American's had proved their loyalty beyond any more doubt. Lastly, Germany had its greatest waves of immigration to the America's either before the US was even a nation, or during its infancy. Italians were a 'new' wave of immigration, pushed into ghettos due to existing social bigotry, and easily differentiated from the normal phenotypic blend of older immigrant populations that became the white American norm. ---- Personally, I believe that this is better stated as ethnic discrimination. In Europe, Africa, and Asia---all 'old world' continents---there is less of a tendency to trumpet ones own race. Rather people have the view that their ethnicity is the best, their bloodline lineage is the best, their family heritage is the best. Discrimination there takes the form of Germany believing that anyone who isn't german is low-class---which includes Spaniards, Italians, British, Russians, Poles, Finns, etc. In the US today, ethnicity has been de-emphasized with a greater focus being put on race and religion, which is to our detriment in understanding both historical treatment of immigrants, and also current day treatment of immigrants. For example: why are so many people against Syrians, but view Saudi's as tolerable? Why is Yemen seen less favourable than Oman?
- KirinDave 10y ago
  > Additionally, many believed that by fighting against Germany in World War 1, all German-American's had proved their loyalty beyond any more doubt. I'd love to see a source for this. My research and interviewing my relatives who were there suggested that they were quite concerned that the germans were "hard to spot". > Italians were a 'new' wave of immigration, pushed into ghettos due to existing social bigotry, and easily differentiated from the normal phenotypic blend of older immigrant populations that became the white American norm. I mean it wasn't _that_ new. There was a major wave of immigration in 1910. But bigotry based on appearance is almost always the basis of this.

tptacek 10y ago

Your argument fails, because Italians obviously weren't the only ethnicity now considered "white" and formerly considered not. The US has never been at war with Ireland, but white America's rejection of the Irish is so well-known it forms the basis for one of the most famous Simpsons jokes.

anigbrowl 10y ago

First, the article doesn't discuss 'whiteness' Your argument is basically that if the word doesn't appear in the original article, we should be able to hold a discussion of that concept that refers to the article. There is a lot more to reading comprehension than iterating over a bag of words to see whether they appear in a given corpus.