@failures art,
failures art wrote:My Grandmother (after being put in the camps), and my Grandfather (after serving in the Army) found that life in the USA post WW2 was very hostile. Even though the war was over, even though they were American citizens and he had even fought for the USA, he would be arrested and jailed under suspicion in every state he drove through as he moved his family from Monterey to Minnesota for the only job he could find that would hire him. He was a well qualified man. He had a degree in Chemistry, distinguished service record in WW2, and a strong work ethic. Despite this, in the eyes of the public, he and his family were just "Japs," and it was clear that "Japs" were not to be trusted.
What you're omitting from consideration here is the usage of the word. Nobody here is saying that all abbreviations are insulting. What is being explained to you here is that words that have been used to culturally subjugate and marginalize ethnic groups are racist, and that the word "jap" is exactly that: A racial slur.
A
R
T
3 points, in response to your post:
1. The people who resented your grandparents after the war
had no way of knowing (
unless so informed) that your grandfather
served in the US Army. Because of the sneak attack on Pearl Harbor
(off topic: which Roosevelt intentionally provoked) the Japs were considered sneaky and not trustworthy,
regardless of whether thay really were trustworthy. During the war, the Japs had been
shockingly sadistic,
such that war stories
abounded about their cruelty and resentment for that was added to the aforesaid sneak attack
on Pearl Harbor. As of today, 65 or 69 years later, it is unreasonable to bear ill will against the Japs for this misconduct
(except of course for any survivors thereof or their families), but at the time, it was indeed reasonable and understandable
for the people to be resentful of that mistreatment. It woud have been a miracle if there had not been such resentment
(
UNLESS, told that your grandfather fought in the US Army; u did not say whether he made that known;
maybe showing an Honorable Discharge).
2. If no one had thought of abbreviating the name of your race,
and if everyone had spelled it out or spoken each syallable fully,
that woud have had not the least effect, however slight, in restraining
them them from vengeful & vindictive discrimination, especially not
from any living survivors of Japanese brutalitiy, but also merely
from those who 'd read of the rape of Nanking in 1937,
let alone the Bataan Death March or how American POWs were treated.
Vengeance coud be executed (passive-aggressively or aggressive-aggressively)
while fully speaking the name, which is a very minor point, relative to what
ELSE coud have happened.
So far as I am aware, the Jews always spoke the word "Germans" fully, but I doubt that had much effect
in reducing their just & proper resentment for what happened.
3. Addressing what u said about a "racial slur":
after the war, there remained such
rage against the sadistic misconduct in question,
from Pearl Harbor thru all of the POW abuse, that no matter
WHAT thay had been called,
Japanese in America were in a ruff ride, again
UNLESS,
exculpated by something like an Honorable Discharge from the US Army.
A slur mean saying that something is
BAD.
The abbreviation does not imply that anything is bad; it only identifies.
American hostility was so intense that so little and slight a matter
as presence or absence of abbreviation woud have no influence on discrimination
in revenge for Japanese abuses, when people were so motivated. Saying the word fully was
no protection from the rage.
I assure u in full sincerity, that when we whites are in conversation among ourselves
when we mention "the Germans or the Japs" that is only by way of identification, and not with malice.
When malice
IS intended, then adjectives must be (and are) added
("those damn nazis" or "those damned Japanese sadists" hanged schoolteachers).
There has been
no correspondence between malice or forgiveness regarding abbreviation.
People who say the
name FULLY have been boiling over with fury and resentment
and when I say the short form I do so with no ill will. It is
non-indicative.
Your posts almost approach implying that if all Americans said
"Japanese" then there 'd be no residual resentment or no discrimination.
I deny that there is any correspondence whatsoever.
When I referred to the commies, I did not hate them
more than when I said communists;
both terms were exactly the same in quality. Take my word for that.
If u believe that u will find evidence of discrimination
in whether or not the word "Japanese" is abbreviated, u adopt
idle superstition.
As an engineer, u shoud adopt better logic.
David
