Japanese Commemorations of World War II in the Mariana Islands

Author(s):  
Keith L. Camacho

This chapter examines the creation and contestation of Japanese commemorations of World War II in the Mariana Islands. As an archipelago colonized by Japan and the United States, the Mariana Islands have become a site through which war memories have developed in distinct and shared ways. With respect to Japanese commemorations, the analysis demonstrates why and how they inform and are informed by Chamorro and American remembrances of the war in the Mariana Islands. By analyzing government, media, and tourist accounts of the war from the 1960s to the present, I thus show how we can gain an understanding and appreciation for the complex ways by which Japanese of various generations reckon with a violent past.

2021 ◽  
pp. 323-350
Author(s):  
Jon D. Wisman

The United States was an anomaly, beginning without clear class distinctions and with substantial egalitarian sentiment. Inexpensive land meant workers who were not enslaved were relatively free. However, as the frontier closed and industrialization took off after the Civil War, inequality soared and workers increasingly lost control over their workplaces. Worker agitation led to improved living standards, but gains were limited by the persuasiveness of the elite’s ideology. The hardships of the Great Depression, however, significantly delegitimated the elite’s ideology, resulting in substantially decreased inequality between the 1930s and 1970s. Robust economic growth following World War II and workers’ greater political power permitted unparalleled improvements in working-class living standards. By the 1960s, for the first time in history, a generation came of age without fear of dire material privation, generating among many of the young a dramatic change in values and attitudes, privileging social justice and self-realization over material concerns.


ASKETIK ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Anjar Sri Wahyuni

The American state that it became the object of the first Islamic da'wah in about 1875, from what was then known as Greater Syria (Great Syria [now includes Syria itself, Lebanon, Jordan and Palestine]) until the end of World War I. Followed by a second wave, in the 1920s to then be stopped because of World War II. Immigration laws in this period are rather limiting. Only black or Caucasian people can enter the United States. Arabs are considered not to fall into the two categories. While the third wave, between the mid-1940s and mid-1960s took place along with the occurrence of important changes outside the United States. Muslims who enter the US in this category are more educated. Most of them migrated because of political oppression. At the same time, especially in the 1960s various changes took place in US immigration policy. The job market is expanding and the country needs potential immigrants to fill the posts. Here ethnic or racial boundaries are loosened. Then the fourth wave, lasting about 1967 and still going on until now. They are generally very fluid and fluent in English. Their immigration is in place for various reasons such as for the improvement of professional ability and avoiding Government oppression. They also have the intention to settle or preach Islam in this Country. And the fifth wave started from 1967 until now. Those who came to America in this wave, in addition to economic reasons, political factors are also the main reasons that encourage them to migrate. There are some proofs that Islam came to America long before Columbus and the West.


Author(s):  
Stephanie Hinnershitz

After World War II and through the 1960s, Asian Americans began a transformative process, from being the “yellow peril” to becoming the model minority, and Asian Americans in the South experienced, to some degree, the same transformation. The war and its mottos of fighting for freedom and democracy at home and abroad affected the way Americans viewed their own hypocrisy toward minorities in the United States. African Americans were the largest minority group to use the aims of the war to demand attention to their plight with Jim Crow, prompting the growth of a nationwide civil rights movement, but Americans also came to view the century-old forms of legal discrimination against Asian immigrants and Asian Americans in a new light. Not only did Congress repeal the Chinese Exclusion Act in 1943 (making it legal for some Chinese to naturalize and allowing a small number of Chinese immigrants to enter the United States), but Filipino Americans and Indian Americans received similar treatment during and after World War II. In 1952, the McCarran-Walter Act (or the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952), although designed to protect American security during the early Cold War by prohibiting and deporting subversive aliens, also made it possible for Asian immigrants of all ethnicities to become American citizens (while the number of Asians admitted to the United States did not drastically increase). Americans also viewed the ability of Japanese Americans to overcome the massive civil rights violations of wartime imprisonment and achieve economic and educational success as a model for all minorities to follow. Asian Americans came through the fires of World War II and proved that they were loyal Americans and deserving of equal treatment and respect, and while more subtle and sometimes not so subtle forms of racism and discrimination ...


2019 ◽  
pp. 346-353
Author(s):  
David Sorkin

This chapter looks at how the Great Migration from eastern Europe made the United States a center of world Jewry. The Nazis' murder of most of European Jewry magnified that status. While the migrants and their children were citizens, their rights were restricted. Thus, in the period after World War II, American Jewry's civil defense organizations engaged in a concerted emancipation campaign. Jews collaborated with African Americans, Catholics, and other minorities to end inequality. That campaign succeeded: from the 1940s to the 1960s, state and federal civil rights laws, and court rulings prohibiting discrimination, dismantled the structure of inequality. Those events constituted American Jews' second emancipation: it positioned the immigrant's children and grandchildren to realize the promise of American equality.


Author(s):  
Paul R. Mullins

In the 1960s Edward J. Zebrowski turned the razing of Indianapolis, Indiana into a compelling show of forward-looking community optimism illuminating the power of displacement. When Zebrowski’s company toppled the Knights of Pythias Hall in 1967, for instance, he installed bleachers and hired an organist to play from the back of a truck as the twelve-storey Romanesque Revival structure was reduced to rubble. Two years later, the ‘Big Z’ hosted a party in the Claypool Hotel and ushered guests outside at midnight to watch as the floodlit building met its end at the wrecking ball (Figure 12.1). Zebrowski’s theatricality perhaps distinguished him from the scores of wrecking balls dismantling American cities, but his celebration of the city’s material transformation mirrored the sentiments of many urbanites in the wake of World War II. The post-war period was punctuated by a flurry of destruction and idealistic redevelopment in American cities like Indianapolis just as the international landscape was being rebuilt from the ruins of the war. In 1959 the New York Times’ Austin Wehrwein (1959: 61) assessed the University of Chicago’s massive displacement in Hyde Park and drew a prescient parallel to post-war Europe when he indicated that ‘wrecking crews have cleared large tracts, so that areas near the university resemble German cities just after World War II’. Indeed, much of Europe was distinguished less by ruins and redevelopment than demolition and emptied landscapes removing the traces of warfare that states wished to reclaim or efface; in the United States, urban renewal likewise took aim on impractical, unappealing, or otherwise unpleasant urban fabric and the people who called such places home (see also Ernsten, Chapter 10, for this process associated with the policies of apartheid in Cape Town). These global projects removed wartime debris and razed deteriorating prewar landscapes, extending interwar urban renewal projects that embraced the fantasy of a ‘blank slate’ as they built various unevenly executed imaginations of modernity. However, many optimistic development plans in Europe and the United States alike were abandoned or disintegrated into ruins themselves, simply leaving blank spaces on the landscape. Consequently, the legacy of urban renewal and post-war reconstruction is not simply modernist architecture; instead, post-war landscape transformation is signalled by distinctive absences dispersed amidst post-war architectural space and traces of earlier built environments.


Itinerario ◽  
1998 ◽  
Vol 22 (3) ◽  
pp. 59-78
Author(s):  
Lloyd C. Gardner

Before World War II, French Indochina little concerned American policymakers. The idea of sending half a million men to fight a war there would have seemed as fantastic as sending a man to the moon. Even after John F. Kennedy decided that the United States should - and could - send a man to the moon, the idea of sending half a million men to Vietnam still seemed fantastic. When George Ball expressed fears that such a possibility indeed existed if matters were allowed to continue until incremental creep became an avalanche, the president was astounded. ‘George’, Kennedy admonished him, ‘you're just crazier than hell. That just isn't going to happen.’ Historians still debate whether Kennedy would have followed the same path Lyndon Johnson took in Vietnam, thereby fulfilling George Ball's seemingly absurd prophecy. My purpose here is not to rehearse the arguments in that debate. Instead, I want to talk about the American ‘cause’ in Vietnam, and how, beginning in World War II, a generalised concern with the problem of closed economies and the creation of a post-colonial world order finally became focused on Vietnam.


Author(s):  
Greg Patmore ◽  
Nikola Balnave

The Rochdale consumer cooperative movements in Australia and the United States, while weak by international standards, have played a significant role in increasing the power of many consumers over the price, quality, and quantity of consumer goods. There have been peaks and troughs in the history of these co-ops for a variety of reasons including inflation, social unrest, competition from private retailers, the level of labor movement and state support, and the influence of immigrant groups. Prior to the end of World War II, Rochdale consumer cooperatives in both countries fluctuated in strength, but they declined in the postwar period with spectacular collapses during the 1980s. Since the 1960s, protest movements have encouraged a new wave of local food cooperatives, particularly in the United States.


1992 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 45-68 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bruce V. Lewenstein

In the United States after World War II, the term `public understanding of science' became equated with `public appreciation of the benefits that science provides to society'. This equation was the result of the independent, but parallel, social and institutional needs of four different groups with an interest in popularizing science: commercial publishers, scientific societies, science journalists, and government agencies. A new, more critical era of popular science began in the 1960s.


2021 ◽  
Vol 45 (2) ◽  
pp. 417-422
Author(s):  
Nelson Lichtenstein ◽  
Cedric de Leon ◽  
Judith Stepan-Norris ◽  
Barry Eidlin

AbstractBarry Eidlin’s book, Labor and the Class Idea in the United States and Canada (Cambridge University Press, 2018) explains why unions are weaker in the United States than they are in Canada, but have not always been that way. Indeed, unionization rates were virtually identical for much of the twentieth century, then diverged in the 1960s. Against dominant accounts focused on long-standing differences in political cultures and institutions, Eidlin argues that the divergence resulted from different ruling party responses to working class upsurge in both countries during the Great Depression and World War II. In Canada, an initially more hostile state response ended up embedding “the class idea”—the idea of class as a salient, legitimate political category—more deeply in policies, policies, and practices than in the United States, where class interests were reduced to “special interests.” In this symposium, three noted labor scholars engage critically with the book. Cedric de Leon interrogates Eidlin’s account of the role of racial divisions in explaining divergence, noting “more persistence and convergence than there is rupture and divergence” between these two countries on this issue. Nelson Lichtenstein’s critique focuses on the exceptionally vociferous character of US employer hostility, which he argues that Eidlin downplays. And Judith Stepan-Norris notes the surprising lack of actual class actors in a book about class organization, while raising interpretive questions about the relation between labor and the Communist Party in both countries. Eidlin concludes the symposium with a response to the critics.


2021 ◽  
Vol 45 (2) ◽  
pp. 417-417
Author(s):  
Nelson Lichtenstein ◽  
Cedric de Leon ◽  
Judith Stepan-Norris ◽  
Barry Eidlin

AbstractBarry Eidlin’s book, Labor and the Class Idea in the United States and Canada (Cambridge University Press, 2018) explains why unions are weaker in the United States than they are in Canada, but have not always been that way. Indeed, unionization rates were virtually identical for much of the twentieth century, then diverged in the 1960s. Against dominant accounts focused on long-standing differences in political cultures and institutions, Eidlin argues that the divergence resulted from different ruling party responses to working class upsurge in both countries during the Great Depression and World War II. In Canada, an initially more hostile state response ended up embedding “the class idea”—the idea of class as a salient, legitimate political category—more deeply in policies, policies, and practices than in the United States, where class interests were reduced to “special interests.” In this symposium, three noted labor scholars engage critically with the book. Cedric de Leon interrogates Eidlin’s account of the role of racial divisions in explaining divergence, noting “more persistence and convergence than there is rupture and divergence” between these two countries on this issue. Nelson Lichtenstein’s critique focuses on the exceptionally vociferous character of US employer hostility, which he argues that Eidlin downplays. And Judith Stepan-Norris notes the surprising lack of actual class actors in a book about class organization, while raising interpretive questions about the relation between labor and the Communist Party in both countries. Eidlin concludes the symposium with a response to the critics.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document