Japan 's Forced Constitution Causes Major Conflicts

When Japan was at the turning point of its economy and in the process of forming a new government, Nakae Chomin wrote A Discourse by Three Drunkards on Government, a political theory book that primarily deals with question of Japan’s future with an interesting debate between Champion and the Gentleman. Character Champion thought that Japan should step out of their isolated island and become more forceful in its handling of foreign disputes. He believed that Japan will stay weak if Japan did not have the strength and forces to conquer other nations. The Western learning Gentleman on the other side is a proponent of the modern Western notion of liberty and equality. He criticized Western nations for maintaining large armies that drained their economy. He suggested that Japan should abandon all attempts to compete with the West militarily and commit itself fully to the values that the West did not have. Approximately sixty years has passed since then, and Champion, Gentleman, and Master Nankai have gathered around once again to discuss the postwar Japan, the rise of the militarism, imperialist aggression, and the subsequent adoption

Political, social, and economic aspects influenced the rise of the Empire of Japan, and their effects created the ways in which Japan interacted with its people and the world around it. Politically, the Meiji Restoration of the mid-1800s to the early 1900s set the stage for the growth that took place to make Japan an Empire, including the transformation of the views on the emperor. These views on the emperor helped to create a social change: the anger of the Japanese government and people about the lack of representation for Japan in world treaties and in the League of Nations. This caused extreme patriotism. Japan was economically changed by the advancements into China after Japan’s Great Depression. This military advancement opened the door for much more and was based on the Japanese’s intense nationalistic views.

Finally, while many Americans of Japanese descent were being gathered into detention centers, others were fighting overseas. Over 30,000 Japanese Americans fought in World War II and these soldiers earned many medals and awards, even the Congressional Medal of Honor, while in service for the United States.

While World War II had been ongoing since 1939, Japan had been fighting for the Axis powers, against the United States. In 1941, when Japan had attacked Pearl Harbor, the United States government had assumed the viewpoint that the Japanese were not to be trusted, and that the Japanese-American citizens of the United States were much the same. As such, they had resorted to establishing internment camps, or preventive labor prisons, so as to keep them in check and ostensibly to prevent further Japanese sabotage. However, the government’s actions were not fully justified, as several factors had interplayed into the circumstances that directly contradicted the intentions and visible results of the internment of the Japanese-Americans, in the social, political, economical, and cultural aspects. On the whole, the internment camps served as drastic measures which were not wholly without reasoning; contrarily, those factors in support of the internment camps did not override those which had gone against it, since the United States’ own legislation, in the form of the Constitution and other laws, had explicitly prevented the depriving of human rights, privileges, and pursuits, which had doubtless applied in light of the Japanese-Americans’ universal citizenship along the Pacific Coast in the early 1940s. As such, while the internment camps were not completely unjustified and without purpose from the viewpoint of the government, they did not align with standards of law and

The topic I choose to right about is the internment of Japanese Americans during WWII. The question that I intend to answer today is: The Constitution guarantees American citizens no imprisonment without due process of law, yet has been violated by the federal government in at least two American wars. How did the government justify interning Japanese-American citizens in World War II? In order to understand why this happened we have to first look at what happened. We are going to look at a couple things in this paper: The Executive Order of 9066 and Korematsu v. United States (1944). As well as we are good to look at just why the U.S. decided to not give these people the basic

The Liberal Democratic Party (LDP) has been the majority party for more than 40 years uninterrupted, except in 1993 and 2009. In 1993, members of the party defected to form a new party, losing the majority control of the party, hence losing control of the government. This temporary loss of power gave reformers a chance at changing the Japanese political structure to include two main parties that regularly alternate power. In 2009 the Democratic Party of Japan (DPJ) won the majority seats. The LDP took back the majority in 2012. During DPJ’s tenure in power, the devastating 2011 Japanese earthquake occurred. When Prime Minister Noda Yoshihiko pushed through a controversial sales tax consumption increase bill through the National Diet. December of that year, the LDP was able to pressure Prime Minister Noda to dissolve the lower house, leading to the LDP gaining the majority. Then in 2013, the LDP reached majority in the upper house too, effectively taking back control of the government. The Diet has been lopsidedly dominated by the LDP over three or four other smaller parties that had practically no chance of controlling the government. However due to pressures from the LDP, the reformers were forced to compromise to retain certain aspects of the old system intact. Many experts believe that the electoral reform does not have a high chance of creating a two-party system that is like the US.

Introduction On December 7th of 1941 one of the most critical events on America’s history occurred, the surprise attack by the Japanese on Pearl Harbor, which brought the United States into the Second World War and changed the course of history (Gordon). This occurrence marked history due to the lack of explanation given by the Japanese at the time. To this day the reasoning behind their attack is still unknown. 1939 is a fundamental year, which marks the start of World War II.

The internment of Japanese-Americans serves as an illustrious example to demonstrate the abysmal execution of this protection. By looking back at events such as this, the people of the United States can prevent acts of this nature from transpiring again. More specifically, it is the responsibility of the judicial branch to ensure the equal protection of the law. Judicial figures should aid in this cause by being more vigilant in assessing laws carried out by the Legislative and Judicial branches of

Constitutional guarantees infringed upon by the internment of Japanese-American citizens that this essay will cover include The First Amendment right to freedom of religion, speech, of the press, to petition the government, and to assemble peacefully. The Fourth Amendment right to protection from unlawful searches and seizures, the Fifth Amendment right to avoid testifying against yourself in a court of law or being deprived the right to life, liberty, and property. As well as the Sixth Amendment right to a speedy and public trial, and Fourteenth Amendment right of all American citizens to equal protection under the law, of the United States Bill of Rights. Along with the following sections of the United States Constitution: Article Ⅰ Section 9 Clause 2, which guarantees the writ of habeas corpus to all United States citizens. Article Ⅰ Section 9 Clause 3, which secures that no bills of attainder or ex-post facto laws (legislative acts that inflict punishments without trial) shall be passed. Last, Article Ⅲ Section 2 Clause 3, which ensures the right to a trial by jury. This essay will also cover precisely how the United States government encroached upon Japanese-American citizen’s constitutional rights.

Despite the papers supposedly claiming Japanese American sabotage, the internment of US citizens of Japanese descent following the bombing of Pearl Harbor was not justified, resulting into violation of the Constitution’s Fifth and Fourteenth amendments.

Article 10. The right of every Japanese citizen to vote shall not be denied or abridged by any legislation, restrictions, or poll taxes on account of religious creed, national origin, ancestry, sex, or military service.

At that point in time, Japan’s politics were inseparably integrated with the population’s ethics and social conduct. Dissenting from the imperial political view was an issue of morality and legality. The law forbade conspiracy, revolution, and other treasonous acts against Japan’s national unity. The law was successful in criminalizing any and all ideologies that would imperil the fragile order of Japan’s emperor-centered society. With this law, a Special Higher Police was established in 1911.

The evacuation of Japanese-American’s in the West Coast is seen as one of the darkest times in American history. The rising tension between the United States and Japan, leading up to the Attack on Pearl Harbor, made the decision for the evacuation much easier. Military and political motives both played a vital role in the action to separate Japanese-Americans from the rest of society during the 1940s. The purpose plays a very large role in the constitutionality of each case, as one has a stronger case than the other. Regardless if the evacuation was constitutional or not, the morality of it is still the same.

This confrontation between Japan and the United States impacted the battles to come in the Pacific. History has proven the island of Midway to be an important base for many operations during World War II. Had the United States lost this battle, the war may have reached a different outcome.

Throughout the work, Fujitani draws evidence from, and references, a plethora of different sources that add validity to his statements and accounts of not only what the Japanese and United States did, but also why they acted the way they did. In a time of war, both countries took different actions that were not readily understood. Japan