During World War II, when Japanese Americans were being sent to internment camps, Fred Toyosaburo Korematsu fled his city in protest against the internment camps. In doing so, he had to sacrifice many things, such as his own look, as he had to get plastic surgery on his eyes in order to hide the fact that he was Japanese. Hearing this today, one might think that Korematsu was praised by Japanese Americans for his actions. On the contrary however, he was shamed for refusing to go to the internment camps, because it was perceived as an inconvenience. Even when Korematsu was sent to prison for his disobedience, the prisoners in his prison also disapproved of his actions, saying “All of them turned their backs on me at that time because they thought I was a troublemaker,” (http://www.nytimes.com/2005/12/25/magazine/he-said-no-to-internment.html?_r=0).
One national bind present in Korematsu’s situation is the national bind of citizenship. Today, forcibly sending all Japanese American citizens to internment camps is very clearly illegal. In fact, Korematsu “was awarded the Presidential Medal of Freedom by President Clinton,” (http://articles.latimes.com/2011/may/24/nation/la-na-japanese-americans-20110525). However, this does not mean the past is forgotten. The Japanese Americans were citizens just like those who portrayed the ideal concept of “whiteness,” yet it is very unlikely that the U.S. government would ever treat their white citizens the way they treated their Japanese American citizens. It is thus clear that the definition of citizenship was (and still is) very different from person to person under the U.S. government. This problem may not be as pronounced today as it was during the internment of Japanese Americans during World War II, but it does indeed still exist. For example, the citizens of Flint, Michigan are treated as lesser citizens by not being given drinkable water. If the situation with Flint, Michigan were to happen in a rich white neighborhood, more action would certainly be taken to fix the problem. This brings up another national bind present in Korematsu’s situation—whiteness. The reason why Japanese Americans were treated so unfairly can be partly attributed to them lacking many traits associated with “whiteness.”
Korematsu’s treatment can also be related to intersectionality. He was treated poorly for being a Japanese American, but not only by the U.S., but also by his own community. By running away, his actions were seen as cowardly, which not only relates to his race, but also his gender. As a Japanese American, he is expected to behave honorably and not cause unnecessary trouble, but as a male, he is expected to not be cowardly and face difficulties without question. The combination of these two traits added to the judgement Korematsu received as a result of his actions.
Overall, Korematsu’s actions were noble, and helps emphasize the unjustness of the Japanese internment camps. Not only was the Japanese internment camps unfair for illegally forcing citizens to live in internments camps, but it was also unfair for taking advantage of the idea of “whiteness.” In addition, it highlights the unfairness that still exists to this day.
Bai, Matt. He Said No to Internment. New York Times, 25 Dec. 2005. Web. 30 Jan. 2017. <http://www.nytimes.com/2005/12/25/magazine/he-said-no-to-internment.html?_r=0>.
Goodnough, Abby, Monica Davey, and Mitch Smith. "When the Water Turned Brown." New York Times, 23 Jan. 2016. Web. 30 Jan. 2017. <https://www.nytimes.com/2016/01/24/us/when-the-water-turned-brown.html>.
Savage, David G. "U.S. Official Cites Misconduct in Japanese American Internment Cases." Los Angeles Times. Los Angeles Times, 24 May 2011. Web. 31 Jan. 2017. <http://articles.latimes.com/2011/may/24/nation/la-na-japane