Talk:Japanese Canadian internment

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search



Time Line?[edit]

when did this all start?

right after Pearl Harbour, duh.Skookum1 (talk) 16:31, 14 June 2008 (UTC)
Skookum, play nice. Wikipedia:Please do not bite the newcomers. We are actually missing a date in the article for a declaration of the "protected area." Besides, you could easily argue that it was simply the end result of a build-up of resentment against Japanese fishermen, and that Pearl Harbor was just a pretext, not the beginning. - TheMightyQuill (talk) 21:32, 15 June 2008 (UTC)
I jut thought it was fairly obvious when, but then I was raised in towns with a high awareness of this and/or the war (Lillooet, where family friends included(d) t he Yadas, well-known in local grocerydom, and Mission, where there had been many Japanese before the war). And in my own readings in BC history, for quite a long time and in other writings elsewhere (on the Tyee as I recall) I laid out a theory that the seizures' roots date right back to the '07 riots, when the Japanese successfully held off the Knights of Labour mob from doing anything to Japantown, whereas Chinatown got ransacked as the Chinese for the most part showed no resistance; the one thing a bully doesn't like, and will nurture a grudge for, is not getting away with their bullying; I've never done the research but donuts to dollars some of those instigating the seizures, in authority or otherwise, were connected to the events of '07...evil has a long memory.....you should try and find Dr. Miyazaki's book btw, about other Japanese neighbourhoods in Vancouver, e.g. Tokyo Mura, which was in the 2nd & Manitoba area.....Skookum1 (talk) 21:58, 15 June 2008 (UTC)

Order in Council PC 365 was passed on January 16, 1942. It designated the 100-mile protected area along the BC coast and order the removal of all male Japanese nationals (Order in Council PC 1486 would be passed three weeks later on February 24, 1942 authorizing the removal of all "persons of Japanese racial origin."). [1] Boutinma (talk) 23:31, 7 April 2015 (UTC)

Pearl Harbor was bombed on the 7th of December 1941 and shortly after in the spring of 1942, the government declared all Japanese Canadians, whether they were citizens or not, to be enemy aliens. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Trollmeupscotty (talkcontribs) 07:33, 28 April 2017 (UTC)

F.Y.I - a discussion on King[edit]

  • I added this here because of the relevancy of the discussion. Your thoughts?
I decided to be bold and removed this bit: "In 1999 King was ranked by historians to be the greatest of Canada's Prime Ministers. (Granatstein & Hillmer, Prime Ministers: Ranking Canada's Leaders.)" Yeah, whatever, Granatstein and Hillmer.Bobanny(eyes rolling) 14:31, 10 October 2006 (UTC)
  • With all due respect, Granatstein and Hillmer are pretty good historians. King would certainly be among the greatest PMs, whatever the criteria, especially if longevity was a main criteria.Moomot 05:38, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
  • Indeed, Granatstein and Hillmer aren't historians whose judgement we should should scoff at. I think you need to justify the edit with more than with just an eye roll. Boubelium 07:47, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
I think mylesmalley made a good point above that justifies removing that claim from the article. Granatstein and Hillmer's claim that King was the greatest PM is a value judgement and has nothing to do with their skills as historians. Besides, scoffing at Granatstein is a proud tradition of Canadian historians, and vice versa. Personally, I find that kind of gushing reverence for any Prime Minister nauseating, especially when it's cloaked as an objective fact, but don't worry, I'll keep my personal opinions out of the article. And please, don't remove the bit about Japanese Canadian being interned during WWII just because Granatstein says it never happened. Bobanny 07:09, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
  • You obviously are intelligent, perhaps if you were less sarcastic and more informative you would have found less issues with your edit. Having read your argument, I agree. You are correct that the greatest PM title does not belong in this article. As for your condescending comments about the Japanese internment, ironically, I spent some time expanding the racism section of this article. Regarding the Granatstein article, he does not claim that "it never happened" but instead argues the semantics of the term 'internment'. Your paraphrasing is either quite careless or malicious; you're essentially making him sound like a Holocaust Denier, which is far from the case. I do appreciate you pointing out the article though, because we (likely) both agree that Granatstein is on dubious ground. When Granatstein argues that there was a 'unanimous call for evacuation" he is exaggerating. See my racism edits on King for evidence. Then again perhaps those that didn't actually fear the Japanese could have supported the internment out fear for their safety, especially given the long history of anti-Asian violence in Vancouver. But, whatever, I don't agree with Granatstein's general perspective here. He's still a great historian even if we don't agree with him that the word 'internment' should be replaces with 'evacuation'. This reminds me, the internment article needs a lot of work. Perhaps we should be discussing this there. Regards Moomot 18:48, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
  • I see that you did read my additions to "Racism," and you improved the writing. Thank You. Moomot 19:19, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
Okay, I'll try and put my smarminess aside. I stand by my opinion that Granatstein's point about Japanese internment is more than semantics, because behind those words are the meaning of the event. "Evacuation" and "internment" are two different things. Yes they were evacuated, but it was quite a different circumstance than, say, an evacuation of an area during a flood or forest fire threat. In the connotation of the word "evacuation," it's purely circumstantial, or an unfortunate event, where no one is to blame but the forces of nature or history. "Forcible displacement" would be more precise to describe the actual removal of those people from their homes. "Internment" on the other hand, is an act of war, defensive or offensive, in which people are confined under threat somewhere and dispossessed of their property and belongings. If the Japanese had resisted the internment, it probably would have looked more like what Granatstein claims the word implies. The scale of the holocaust makes that comparison unfair, but the underlying principle is the same: a nationalist glossing of the past, and that's what I'm accusing Granatstein of. He's defending a view whereby the true or authentic "Canadian" identity or experience is represented by the most privileged people in society, the "great men" of history like King. Hence the unanimous call for evacuation. Japanese-Canadians were not calling for evacuation, nor were the RCMP operatives who reported that no national security threat existed from west coast Japanese. Local white entrepreneurs who scored some great deals on Japanese property and were able to take over that portion of the coastal fishing industry as a result were the voice of Canada in the national pride version. It's also worth pointing out that some Italians, who actually did have fascist sympathies and affiliations, were interned as well, but only for a short while and then in relatively swanky conditions in Ontario. The things I feel are most worthy of Canadian pride are where past mistakes are not forgotten or minimized, but are openly acknowledged and measures are taken to ensure they aren't repeated. This discussion is also relevant to the current issue of redress for the Chinese head tax, which has brought out some of that old racist sentiment here in Vancouver. But, the average Chinese or Japanese on the west coast are as prosperous, if not more, than whites, and that's a change to be proud of. I don't believe, as Granatstein does, that highlighting past injustices constitutes a chronicle of shame, as if it somehow cancels out the positive things in the past, just like King's racism doesn't cancel out his accomplishments. Similarly, again, I'm not questioning Granatstein's abilities as a historian or his notable contributions to Canadian historiography because of my opinion of him on this, just as, hopefully, your opinion that I'm condescending doesn't cancel out the one that says I'm intelligent (you could probably add "wordy" to that list :) Bobanny 20:21, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

Apology?[edit]

Did the Canadian government ever apologize?

Nope. The government offered the money, but no official apology. -CLOWND

Incorrect, the government made a public apopolgy the same day that the Japanese people were offered compensation for their losses. The government payed all citizens of Japanese culture who had been affected. A rather large sum considering the property values. Although that doesn't justify the internment it shows very clearly that the government was sorry. The government was not all at fault, the government was pressured by people who were racially discriminating the Japanese. I don't side only with the government because what happened was wrong and unfair. I don't believe that giving a man $140.50 for his house is correct, but the government compensated the individuals for their extreme loss. -Kay Lee

$21,000 is not a rather large sum. As well, grants from the human rights fund is for arts only. - Stephen Kawamoto

I agree with this, my grandparents were put away into prison camps, and when they were released, (even though they had not done ANYTHING) their land had been auctioned off by the government at cheap prices, and were not allowed to have it back! (PS- now that land is worth MILLIONS) They had to work for cheaper salaries, they had nowhere to live, and they had done nothing to deserve that! The Canadian government should have bought back the land and given them the apology. -Isabel Cathleen —Preceding unsigned comment added by Isabelcathleen (talkcontribs) 02:34, 25 November 2010 (UTC)

Cleanup[edit]

This article needs to be expanded and converted to proper style. It should include information about the massive confiscation of Japanse boats and property, as well as internment of people into camps.

More pictures are available here. -- TheMightyQuill 18:43, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

New item on List of concentration and internment camps[edit]

List_of_concentration_and_internment_camps#Japanese Canadian internment_and relocation centres I just added a section on this page, which previously had only had information on the Ukrainian Canadian internments in WWI. I didn't want to copy the intro overleaf so "winged it" and wrote a new one; edits welcome, as well as formatting of listed camps/centres and expansion of info on those in other provinces, which I'm not familiar with. Somewhere I've seen a map by one of the Japanese Canadian associations which I'll link once I find it again.Skookum1 00:53, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

Issues, issues, issues....somebody has issues[edit]

Unlike Japanese American internment, where families were generally kept together, Canada initially sent its male evacuees to road camps in the British Columbian interior, to sugar beet projects on the Prairies, or to internment in a POW camp in Ontario, while women and children were moved to six inland British Columbia towns [citation needed]. There, the living conditions were so poor that the citizens of wartime Japan even sent supplemental food shipments through the Red Cross.[citation needed] During the period of detention, the Canadian government spent one-third the per capita amount expended by the U.S. on Japanese American evacuees.[citation needed]
  • The last of those sentences I can deal with, so long as a formal statistic is provided to back up the claim.
  • The sentence before it, about the Red Cross relaying food to the relocatees, I can also deal with, but aspects of the scale of such relief should be included, and also the reasons why; it is a given, for instance, that Japanese foodstuffs, particularly staples, could not be imported via regular means during the war, and such packages from the Japanese Empire's side vaulable propaganda were not just "a touch of home" for the internees, but also efforts to sway them in their exile; but also because no doubt some Japanese elders, like First Nations, elders, cannot live without their traditional foods because of lifelong adaption to a certain menu; it's not as if the Canadian government or the camp's neighbours were deliberately starving the internees, as happened in Japanese concentration camps as well as, more recently, in Bosnia; in other words this sentence is overblown in its scope and implications; and rings of brow-beating as if it were yet another instance of white injustices against non-whites; I wonder how many Red Cross packages were delivered to foreign POWs and other internees in the Japanese Empire in the same period, for instance? No doubt the packages included imperial propaganda as well as wasabi paste, and may have been viewed as skeptically by their recipients as the broadcasts of Tokyo Rose (which, granted, weren't available in the camps as if I recall radios were forbidden...not that there was anything but CBC, if that, in the valleys in the Kootenays they were interned in; at the relocation centres in the Lillooet Country radios were useless - in the '50s and until the mid-'60s you could only get fuzzy microwave and AM late at night because of the depth of the valleys, and I don't think there was a transmitter in the local metropolis of Lillooet until after the war; the only relocation centre that was a tarpaper camp was in East Lillooet, near today's airport, although coming and going to town for shopping and work outside the camp were permitted until after the war...Skookum1 04:49, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
  • As for the first sentence, I don't know which mock history/pamphlet that came from, but in Canada, also families were generally kept together, at least with the Relocation Centres (not the same as internment camps); if there are exact stats and cites on the notion that families were split up - here implied to have been deliberately split up, as a form of cruelty and more proof of general white nastiness - then they should be provided. There's too much popular myth about the internment as also about other race issues in BC past, and many of these myths take things out of context, or outright invented contexts; that first sentence didn't sit well with me because the Japanese in my area (Lillooet) were relocated as families and not split up, other than the guys from McGillivary Falls who were brought back inside the 100-miles-from-the-coast line to work for Frank Devine at his mill and logging operation near D'Arcy, while their wives held down the old resort at the Falls, a few miles down the lake from D'Arcy (cite My Sixty Years in Canada, by Dr. Masajiro Miyazaki.Skookum1 04:38, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
Given that these citation requests were placed on 6 September (first sentence) and 18 May (second and third sentences), it would appear no references are forthcoming. As their accuracy is either in question or disproven, I recommend the sentences be deleted. Victoriagirl 05:20, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
The reason I was waiting to see if someone might provide them is because there are echoes of academic literature and some of the popular-historical literature (Suzuki and others) in some of what was said; so I was curious to see if any papers or particular books might be the sources of this material; which as noted in my exegesis on them are more interpretations of facts, if there are facts, than the facts themselves; and only certain facts, y'see, which is my overall problem with current historiography (academic and popular-press/journalistic history). Anyway, I wouldn't be surprised if the cheap-o Canadian regime spent less per capita; or you could see that as efficiency (in the case of US spending I'd guesstimate there was your typical military/civil graft going on, the equivalent of the $200 toilet seat; here it was more targeted confiscations based on old commercial rivalries and personal hostilities; a much more "small town" kind of operation, vs the huge numbers and logistics in the US, and of course the more heightened state of war-consciousness down there (as usual).Skookum1 05:40, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
The problem with the blame-game with Japanese Canadian internment is that blame is directed entirely too much against the government. If I recall correctly, the government first resisted then finally caved to public pressure. The head of the Canadian military was totally opposed to widespread internment, as he saw it was totally unnecessary. The Japanese in Hawaii, for instance, we not rounded up in the same way they were in BC. Confiscations of Japanese businesses, fishing boats, and homes were instituted as part of the legislation, but laws encouraging confiscations of businesses and fishing boats were already on the books (or had been struck down) in BC, not due to war hysteria, but pre-existing racist hysteria. -- TheMightyQuill 05:32, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
It's not just the blame game, MQuill; it's the over-generalization of "all men were sent to the Prairies and women were sent to the six towns in the Kootenays so as to break up families" gist of the opening sentence; the implied cruelty of starvation and the need for the Red Cross to supply them with food (that's an outrageous claim, but the kind of thing that's all too common in revanchist personal histories like Suzuki's); likewise the bitch about Canada spending less on its camps (one good reason is they didn't have to build camps per se, as we had lots of empty towns - Sandon, Kaslo, New Denver, Rosebery, Minto, McGillivary Falls, Bridge River - with complete houses). As with the history of Chinese Canadians there's a lot of one-sided and quite pejorative generalizations being made that constitute a combination of white-bashing and white-guilt pandering; there's also a certain myopia as mentioned in NAJC publications, which focus on David Suzuki's and Joy Kogawa's childhood perceptions vs. the experience of Dr. Miyazaki and the very different experiences of the relocation centres around Lillooet vs the intermment camps in the Kootenays (a similar bias-of-omission operates in Chinese Canadian history re successes in the goldfields and ranching which are obscured so as to focus on railway labour issues).Skookum1 20:00, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

First, I don't see why you're drawing links between Chinese Canadian history and Japanese-Canadian internment. All history is full of biases, so I'm not sure what the connection is between these groups, aside from their perceived asian "race." Second, if there are factual errors, please feel free to correct them, but I find your suggestions of "white-bashing" and "white-guilt" pandering a little silly. The motivations behind interning (or "relocating" as you seem to favour) people whose families had lived in Canada for generations were clearly racial, not military. As far as I'm concerned, that's the core issue. Like the internment of Ukrainians during WWI, many of whom had left Europe to escape oppression under the Austro-Hungarian Empire, most of these people were not interned for legitimate reasons. In the case of Japanese-Canadians, however, the financial gains for white citizens was an important extra factor in internment/confiscation. As for the comparison of costs between Canadian and American internment, I would say your explanation may well be true, but unless you can back it up, it's just as POV as the current phrasing. It doesn't seem impossible that Americans may also have had empty towns. -- TheMightyQuill 20:52, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

Not in the same number; BC has 1500 ghost towns, at the opening of WWII hundreds were still standing; despite the archetypal image of ghost towns in the US West, there were not as many, and in many cases they failed for lack of water, etc. - it's just certain ones became very famous (Deadwood, Virginia City etc). But I think the difference in spending - if it can be cited - has more to do with a combination of American military-budget squandering and graft vs. Canadian "thriftiness"; ditto that there's another side to the Red Cross packages from Japan, which here are presented, alongside the rest of this paragraph, to show the meanness of the Canadian internment/relocation, but there are clearly other issues at play (special dietary needs, the role of the Red Cross in general); it's not as if Imperial Japan were feeding BC's internees/relocatees because BC wouldn't, which is what it's made to sound like. Same with the splitting up of the families; I don't know the history of the Kootenay camps in detail, but in the case of the Lillooet relocation centres this is absolute nonsense; but again it's presented as if Canadians were so much worse than Americans. THAT's the white-bashing or white-guilt-pandering I'm talking about, and why I think this article is POV; the connection to the Chinese Canadian stuff is the similar biases and implicit white-bashing on History of Chinese immigration to Canada and on the various Chinatown and American/Canadian Chinese cuisine pages and others ("Patterns of Chinatowns in North America" is yet another article of the ethno-tub-thumping variety). Someone somewhere said, I think on the talk page of the immigration article, that I should provide cites; but everything I bring up is already in books cited, it's just ignored by the latter-day politically-correct blinkers-on mentality; and as far as current academic papers go, if you try and get a history or other degree WITHOUT agreeing with the prevailing ideology/version of history, you WON'T get a degree, or get published.Skookum1 21:07, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

Dude, I'm not sure if you're aware of this, but the majority of Americans (and I'd assume the entire American government in 1941) were white. How suggesting that "Canadians were so much worse than Americans" could be construed as "white-bashing" is beyond me. As for your perceived bias among academic historians (I assume you'd exclude Jack Granatstein?) that may be a systemic bias inherent to wikipedia, but this is hardly the place to debate that. If you make changes and include specific footnotes, I'm pretty sure there won't be major complaints. Your changes so far seem fine to me. TheMightyQuill 21:17, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

BTW since it's out of print and was only ever gestetner-published anyway, I'm going to typetransfer Dr. Miyazaki's book (booklet really) to a sandbox page for ref purposes; I'll be checking with the Lillooet Historical Society as to its copyright as, since it's out of print and maybe copyright-expired, I might just put it up as a webpage on my own site (www.cayoosh.net). Always wanted to find someone to translate it to Japanese, partly because of the Japanese bus tours that roll through there regularly....Skookum1 20:05, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

Awesome. I'm not sure I've heard of it. What's it called? --TheMightyQuill 20:52, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

My Sixty Years in Canada - see Masajiro Miyazaki.Skookum1 21:07, 12 November 2006 (UTC)


This section is a mess because it misses the historical roots in the treatment of male and female "wogs" under the yoke of British imperialists. Separating husbands from families was a 19th century tactic to achieve pacification. Only if the males behave can they apply for reunion with their families after a period of time.

In WW2 Canada it was one year. The males east of the Rockies were paid 75 cents per hour for road labour, of which 50 cents was retained to pay the cost of supporting their families. Cases were known of men permitted to train west, but got too excited on the train, frightened guards, and only got to see their waiting family through coach windows before being taken back to Alberta. No kidding.

A parallel situation was a British internee camp on the Isle of Man. Men were detained at one end of the island, women and children at the other. A large wooden pavilion was built in the middle. Husbands and wives who made no trouble during the week got to meet Saturday nights, where a dance band would provide entertainment. This phenomenon remains an embarassment to the United Kingdom.---Ed Chilton.

Questionable edit[edit]

I have just reversed the following addition:

"For the duration between 1946 and 1949 remaining detainees could be released if they could obtain a canadian sponsor/guarantor, a number of these were offered by opportunist types via arranged marriages to buy freedom for family members; a prison with different walls."

I find this information and the accompanying edit summary ("just something I saw on tv. women selling themselves to end the 5-6 years of imprisonment already served") suspect. I would appreciate input on this matter. Victoriagirl 01:44, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

the show was Canada: a people's history. a woman interviewed explained the sponsorship and her arranged marriage to a friend of the family being part and parcel for her father/brothers release. this JC internment page is pitiful I'm glad you find time to say "I've never heard that" rather than contributing something.

It was never my intention to offend. And it is, of course, perfectly fair for a user to remove an unreferenced piece of information. I encourage you to reintroduce the information with relevant reference.
In fact, I have made several contributions to this entry - all in the interests of improving and providing information on this very important episode.
I recognize that you are a new user and am sorry if my edit appeared unfair. Rest assured, it was performed in good faith. Before proceeding you may wish to read about this policy. Victoriagirl 03:49, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

-so... you recommend I edit the page and remove all content that reads "citation needed"?? that'll be fairrrrrrrrr huh why don't you find another flavour of the day "episode" to play crossing guard on and let others who want to share with us all the insults that followed the initial injury that was imprisonment post what they want. and if I'm posting secondhand from them it's sure better than nothing

Attn MQ: Your changes[edit]

Hi; I should really finish my porridge and cottage cheese and banana, but saw your changes to my tweaks to the Japanese internment article. My rebuttals:

  • Military and RCMP authorities felt the public's fears were unwarranted (although soon proven otherwise), but the public opinion quickly pushed the government to act.
    • To me, since I know the history of the actual war in BC fairly well (and not just about the internments, which is all anybody else seems to know or care about these days) and the facts are that there were spies, or at least potential spies in the form of some imperia loyalists (who Dr. Miyazaki alludes to in his book, and Joy Kogawa or David Suzuki were too young to be aware of) and there were threats to the coast from the Japanese navy, in various ways; it's why the old searchlight beacon on Woodward's, which you could see from Mission and Bellingham, got shut down and the Big W put up instead; the risk of air raids wasn't "unwarranted", and it wasn't negligible; but shipping attacks by subs and potential landings by saboteurs were encountered, though granted not to any great extent; and the fire balloons were, mercifully, a dud (would have only taken half a dozen to ignite the whole province these last tinder-dry years, though, huh?). What I'm getting at is the language of that sentence needs changing as it currently has a POV tone, as if the public were irrational or, more pointedly, paranoiac; that the authorities put out statements to calm those fears is not borne out by the record of their war preparations and the encounters with Japanese vessels on the coast. It's not like there wasn't a war going on, and in any war the military never tells the public what it needs to know, only what it wants it to know. And the fears were warranted, as I know some writers about the war have talked about. Not Joy Kogawa or David Suzuki, by the way. Point is that without what I'd put in there, or some other way of pointing out that the "unwarranted" statement by the authorities wasn't actually valid, though thankfully not to a truly perilous degree (there wasn't a Battle of Tofino or a Battle of Kitsilano, thankfully). So right now what you've got remains POV, and while my adjustment didn't have the right langauge and came over POV, so does yours.
  • However, four of those camps were not internment camps but "relocation centres" in the Lillooet area which housed selected middle and upper class families and others not deemed as much a threat to public safety (see Masajiro Miyazaki).
    • The four camps were East Lillooet, Bridge River (better written up at Shalalth for now; I just created Bridge River and haven't had a lot of time with it...it's one of the places I'm from), and Minto City, and McGillivray Falls, British Columbia - all, like Tashme, just outside the 100-miles-from-the-coast exclusion/quarantine zone, McGillivray just outside it. But there was no barbed wire or even a curfew or a constable/guard at any of the se camps - no access to the outside was possible except via Lillooet, and from there only wagon roads up and down the Fraser in those days still - and the guys at McGillivray got hired by Frank Devine from D'Arcy to work at his mill and logging camp two miles up the Gates River from there - well inside the exclusion zone by about 5 miles, and they worked and lived there during the week for most of the war, taking the rail line (or boat) down Anderson Lake to stay with their families at McGillivray, which was an old railway resort. Skookum1 09:42, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

Bridge River was a nicely-built 1920s model village for the power project, which was defunct/dormant at the time, although some of the single men and some poorer families there were housed in workmen's barracks; but most of the houses were really nice bungalows in the company style, and there were jobs to be had in Shalalth proper, about two miles away, for the transportation company (Evans Transportation Company, which I'll do an article for as "very notable" although no one's heard of it today; Minto City was another model company town, built only recently in 1936 with well-built houses and also what few jobs there were to be had in the area; the Bridge River houses only built in 1926 or so, those at McGillivray about 1920 (not as sturdy as those at Minto or Bridge). At Shalalth, the Japanese guys unloaded trucks bringing gold concentrate from Bralorne and Pioneer - and left them out on the covered freight platforms, unguarded, as was also the case with themselves. Nowhere to run - but also, as Miyazaki allude to, to get in the relocation centres some material success or professional standing was needed, and there may have been payoffs or investments of some kind, although he doesn't explain; he makes mention of a guy at Minto that was a suspected spy/loyalist and known to be an ardent Japanese nationalist, but says he doesn't know anything about him so cannot comment (can't remmber the guys' name- began with M); but from Minto to the outside, well, that's the hardest one of all (you have to be there to understand). Skookum1 09:42, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

East Lillooet was a camp, but also un-barbed although the shacks were the usual tarpaper things; but so were a lot of other people's places in that area, when not dug into the ground or hewn out of raw logs, as was the case with Indians and a lot of non-Indians as well. The East Lillooet Japanese easily got day passes to go into town (about four miles away) and all wound up working for the Chinese and others in their stores and in trades and on the newly-reflourishing market gardening industry there, which the Chinese had started and which had flourished during the building of the PGE - and as I think I've noted in your presence before, the Chinese welcomed the Japanese despite what was known to be going on in China; and many Japanese stayed on after the war, notably Dr. Miyazaki but also the Yada and Takemoto families and others; I met a woman up there, a native elder who's also part Norwegian, part Japanese, part Chinese, part Irish and I can't remmeber what else.....intermarriage on all sides was common in Lillooet, which gets described as a "racist town" but which Dr. Miyazaki spells out clearly "you can't be a racist and stay in Lillooet for long" - not back then anyway. So this long digression is about the reality of the relocation centres; they're in Dr. Miyazaki and so that same paragraph I'm putting in with a ref to him; if you want an explanation of what they are I'm sorry I don't have his book handy (it's in the SFU stacks) but if it's good enough for the Japanese Canadian National Congress or whatever it's called, it's good enough for me - the relocation centres are marked with a different flag/logo than the internment camps on a map somewhere on this site. Skookum1 09:42, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

I know you think I'm a racist POV bastard with some of my edits; but I find articles such as this which dwell on p.c. analysis aren't very objective in their langauge or their content; syntax can prejudice meaning or be used to imply meanings, such as in the preivous language, even when it's not (consciosuly) intended. But this case is different from the "unwarranted/warranted" issue - it's factual, discussed at length in one of the sources which is set in four of them (actually five, because Miyazaki also served as doctor for the Taylor Lake Camp, which was somewhere within a long day's drive of Lillooet but isn't mentioned in any of the other things I've seen/read; seems to have been down by Aspen Grove/Princeton which is one possible location from BC basemap's index for several Taylor Lakes; in the book it almost sounded like the Cariboo but the Nicola country's similar. Whatever; the relocation centres were different from the internment camps, and there as also at New Denver, Lemon Creek, Taylor Lake, Sandon and elsewhere families were not separated from their husbands; not all of them; Tashme's the ugly one, the grunt camp where the single men and the lowclass elements were put to work on Highway 3, living in pouring rain and dark in camp that can only be compared to a stalag; likewise Lemon Creek, which was also constructed. but in the other cases - New Denver, Sandon, Bridge River, Minto, McGillivray - they were moved into abandoned towns, not tarpaper shacks, and into actual houses and other buildings, albeit in Sandon's and New Denver's case the buildings tended to be a good 30 years older than those at Bridge or Minto. Not everybody lived in tarpaper shacks behind barbed war, not everybody had their daddy taken away for weeks at a time, not everybody had other kids be mean to them for being Japanese; but Kogawa and Suzuki did, and this has tainted all their writing about the war with resentment - POVness. There is a serious credibility problem with books about the internment which omit mention of the Lillooet -area relocation centres; most even don't mention Dr. Miyazaki, even though he's an Order of Canada winner; I think the reason is because his autobiog isn't politically useful; rather qutie the contrary; same problem as with the omissions and distortions of Chinese Canadian history, which also abound in negativity and rankly incorrect generalizations and misrepresentations. Sure, I'm POV about this; it's in response to having my back up against the wall.....when I know that the wall is truth, and I'm defending it.Skookum1 09:42, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

Yet Kogawa and Suzuki and other ethno-POVoid axe-grinding is presented as citable as if it weren't inherently POV to start with (especially when written by people who had only been children at the time, unlike Dr. Miyazaki who was an established professional and had an adult's sense of observation, and a doctor's cool - and there's not one little touch of hatred in his book, not one.....it's not literary in any way, more like a country doctor's notebook). But then Miyazaki, like the other Japanese there, was accepted by the local community and respected by him, and spent his life improving health and social conditions there, which is why his OC. Anyway, if I can find that JCNC (acronym sp?) map I'll be back with it; but the relocation centres were distinct from the internment camps and there's no need for a further cite for that than Dr. Miyazaki's book (what do you want - a page number????); if it's not in the other sources, and no mention of these camps/centres or their conditions is made in those other histories, I'm afraid I have to adjudge them as incomplete and faulty and misrrepresentative. Oh, and POV. Isn't citing POV sources also POV?Skookum1 09:32, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

Firstly, I can see that your edits were in good faith, and didn't suggest otherwise, but the fact is, suggesting that the public's fears were or were not justified by the amount of spying that may have gone on is POV or at least, original research. Currently, the article doesn't say the fears weren't justified, only that the military didn't consider them so. If the CBC article isn't good enough evidence of that, I can find more. If you want to cite specific evidence that some (possible) spies were found, that's fine, but not the way you added it. You could write "A few spies were found, therefore the internment was justified" but I could just as easily write "Only a few spies were found, therefore the widespread internment was unjustified." It's POV to judge outright. In my opinion, the facts clearly speak for themselves in this case.
I also have no problem with you describing differences between the camps, or stating (if this is truly the case) that they were given different names at the time. If this is the case of them being named differently after the fact, it's silly. I've already been through a battle to have Concentration Camp and Internment Camp merged into a single article. There is no NPOV difference between the terms, or between Internment camp and relocation camp. Barbed wire or not, people were interned there by force, and not allowed to leave. It was a camp, not a prison. They were concentrated there, so they could all be equally called concentration camps, though obviously this has acquired a new meaning since the liberation of Nazi camps, so I wouldn't suggest it. On the other hand, simply trying to soften the image of the camps by using a different term is POV. If some were more comfortable than the others, just say that. The whole section on camp conditions is uncited and needs to be re-written anyway. You might as well put in some useful information. =) - TheMightyQuill 04:33, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

Road projects[edit]

I added the working stuff in the paragraph on the exclusion zone as there were men that were working, and also those who were inside, or just on the edge, of the exclusion zone, and lots who worked on things other than road projects or sugar beet farms. But the maps in the cites just provided also show the areas of the road projects, which helped build the Blue River-Yellowhead Pass and Allison Pass and Eagle Pass stretches of highway; not sure where they're mentioned if they are but they were important to the province's post-war economy, as things turned out (slave labour is always economical to get megaprojects done with that would cost to much money in ordinary economics for public works...). If they're there, they were a big enough part of the situation to warrant at least a section heading; I'm just not sure where as yet; enough for tonight, didn't even mean to be at this page.....Skookum1

Self-supporting centres were not internment camps[edit]

You might want to think so, because of hte judgements passed on them and the definitions applied which enable people like you to state taht something that in its time had a speific name, apposite to "internment camp", is still an internment camp. EVEN though the national association of Japanese Canadians doesn't think so, and makes a POINT of listing them separately, and defining them separately. But apparently YOU know better than they do, or Dr. Miyazaki who experienced them did )and makes a point of distsnguishing the much worse conditions at Taylor Lake, wherever that was; and the NAJC defines and maps them separately [1][2]. It's nonsense like your position or pretense that "well, if they got cooped up then it says here in my dictionary that it's an internment camp. But if someone from one those places says it's NOT an internment camp, and provdes a cite from a veteran of it saying the same thing, and from the National Association of Japanese Canadians saying the same thing.....but you nkow better, and im my experince have been policing this article to maintain a POV exclusive of non-negaitve inforamtion, or what you think is non-neative information. In this case the meaning of a definintion, "an invititation to an edit war". Well, aside from knowing that I cited what I cited properly - but not good enough for you, and given that you obviously prefer and are ready to defend the politically-coreee tone of po-mo historicism. Why until I added it did the article's intro focus only on road camps qnd beet farmrs and mot metnionign whole towns like Greenwood, Bridge River, Minto and Sandon which had actual houses; this is in response to your edit comment, which I was able to see, but for now my glasses got lost on the bus so I'm typing this blind. Self-supporting centres were NOT internment camps, even though you need to think so. The triple cite I provided I could repeat here but it's laboriously to do when you're typing near-blind.....G'nite and you've given me yet another good reason to leave Wikipedia......too bad; you shoyuld open you mind, you might learn something.Skookum1 06:44, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

If you really want to hate me over this, have a read on this Rafe Mair apologia familias' in The Tyee, i.e. my debate with the editor in the forum; there were emails in the background after the last posts; we agreed to disagree, but Charlie Campbell (the ed.) is not an authority, noly somebody working from a styleguide and set of journalistic/political prejudices (like any jounralist); opinions such as his are not facts, except as expressions of opinion/judgement, given that there are opposing evidentiary material coming from prime sources (Miyazaki and the NAJC) which are obviously more authoritative and "encyclopedically valid" than journalistic/poiltical analysis, especially origating from the heavily politicized I.e. POV envirnoment of modern academia and journalism. You want toimpose a post-modern definition on a time that did not have those definitions, nor your values, and also to impose it on people who obviously know something more than you about it, "but you know better'> Fine, you get to own this page as I'm gone from wikipedia after next weekend. have fun rewriting history - everybvody does it. Some just do it with more integrity and objectivity than others...... Skookum1 06:52, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
Dude, they were interned in a camp. They were concentrated in a camp. They were resettled in a camp. Any of these terms could be used accurately. There may have been defined differently in this case, but in general the words are synonyms. I have no problem with you citing the differences between camps, and saying "these were called internment camps and these were not." Nevertheless, if I call my home an internment camp, it doesn't make it so, and if I'm in a penitentury yet claim I'm not in prison, that doesn't make it so either. Stop making some big political deal out of this. I'm glad that in Miyazaki you managed to find a source that agrees with your POV so you can keep up your rants, but it's really beside the point. If you want to leave wikipedia because you don't agree with me and other users, fine, but don't blame it on this issue, because you're making it bigger than it needs to be. You condescending tone and suggestion that I "open my mind" is not appreciated, friend. Take care, TheMightyQuill 17:59, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
the source that "supports my POV" - otherwise known as the truth - is the National Assn of Jpanese Cdn website; Dr. Miyazaki is where I became aware of the distinction. But clearly so is the National Assoiation of Japanese Canadians. Condescending tone - REALL, given your patronizing snot about "my POV" when it's the NAJC's POV, and a Japanese Canadian OC winner's POV. This is a question of definitions, of citability. YOU can go "POV, POV< POV" all you want while enforcing your own POV; I've seen it before in other cases: you're pretrending to NPOV but you're not capable o being objective about sourdces.
Dude, they were interned in a camp. They were concentrated in a camp. They were resettled in a camp.

McGillivray Falls was not a camp, Bridge River was not a camp, Minto city was not a camp. None had guards, none had barbed wire, and while for example ()f many periopd sources yo'ure cleraly too superiot to have to read, since you eveidnetly prefer to read/cite materialz filtered through modern academic and p;litical prejudices) Dr. Miyazaki says "interned" he does not say "internment camp". But to heck with Miyazaki - the NAJC should be good enough, but apparently not because of your superior wisdom as to the miniing of the word "camp". Yeah, well, enjoy owning this page. I hope someone comes along who has time to dress down your arrogance and put things to right on this page; subtle sins of omission are not subltle at all to those who know what's been omitted; you're a POV patroller, is what you are, i.e. patrolling to enforced a POV< not enforce NPOV. I have 40 Lillooet-area articles to write this week before I'm gone, and another 80 in the same area to tidy up - perhaps you'd care to remove my anti-Japanese POV from Shalalth and Bridge River, British Columbia and Minto City, British Columbia, too? If I catch you changing "relocation centre" there to "internment camp".......oh, man, is that gonna cause a RfM, and I don't really have the time or energy to deal with such sophomoric stubbornness as you have over my time arond wiki repeatedly displayed; not as bad as certain others, but your one-time comment "I'm about the only friend you've got on Wikipedia" comes to mind - in all its glorious patronizing-ness......Skookum1 18:30, 21 April 2007 (UTC) Sources whic omit any metion of self-supporting centres are incomplete sources; sources that insist that the self-supporting centres were "concentration camps" or "intermnment camps" are making opinion statements, classificiation-judgements, and not referencing the actual contemporary classification/title sysytem, but rather imposing their own views and pretending they are fact. But "The opinions of ten fools do not add up to a fact".Skookum1 18:33, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

Overview[edit]

In Canada, as both an actual US Territory and a legal British Dominion, Prime Minister William Lyon Mackenzie King declared war to nazi Germany just a day after Great Britain and carried out immediately in Canada the FDR Executive Order 9066 on Japanese Relocation, but under the name of the British “War Measures Act” to please to both the FDR Administration and to the British Columbia trend for ethnic cleansing against the prosperous Asian settlement on the West Coast. The British “War Measures Act” has been carried out by the British troops for the first time in 1755 with the Acadian deportees. The last time has been in 1970 against French Canadians for fear of armed upraise in Quebec. Evacuation from the West Coast of Japanese Canadians and their relocation inland as far as Montreal followed the same path as the one in the USA. The militaries built barrack compounds and a cheaper way was to repopulate Canadian ghost towns with a newer population of internees. As the war drew to a close, the US relocation centers were slowly evacuated in 1945. But, in Canada, internment went as long as 1949, 4 years after le unconditional surrender of Japan on August 1945. In 1949, some hundreds of Japanese Canadian juveniles, born in Canada (the “Nisei” and "Sansei" or second and third generation of Japanese immigrants), have been deported. Fortunately for Canada, the young boy becoming Dr. David Suzuki was not among them. In 1988, Prime Minister Brian Mulroney, after the US Public Law 100-383 passed by the US Congress during the Reagan-Bush years, acknowledged in Canada the injustice of the internment of Canadian citizens deprived of their civil rights, apologized for it, and provided a cash payment to each person who was interned and has lost wealth and property confiscated and sold by the government or to descent.

The above paragraph sounds more like a rant than anything else... Denis (talk) 18:07, 21 May 2015 (UTC)

Many historians believe internment camps came about because of racist attitudes Canadians held towards Japanese Canadian's, many of whom lived in BC. Once the bombing on Pearl Harbor happened, racism came to ahead. British Columbians started to blame all their troubles and problems on the Japanese. Japanese people were blamed for everything from a bad crop to a flat tire. The scared people of BC cried out, wanting the BC Government to deal with the problem as they saw it-Japanese Canadians.

The people of British Columbia wanted to feel safe in their homes again and they wanted Prime Minister Mackenzie King to rid Canada of people of Japanese origin. They were causing a threat to Canada (or so it was believed by the public.) Mackenzie King wanted the votes from BC, so he was more than happy to do what they asked. Mackenzie's first order of business was to incarcerate all Japanese males between the ages 14 and 45. They were ordered to move more than 160 km inland. This was to "safe guard" the pacific coast from Japanese spies. The Canadian government took away all of the Japanese fishing fleets, in order to protect Canada. Over a nine month period 22 000 people were taken from their homes and scattered throughout BC. By October 1942, the Canadian government had set up 8 internment camps in interior BC. They were in Kaslo, New Denver, Tashme, Roseberry, Slocan City, Lemon Creek, Sandon, and Greenwood. Tashme was named after the 3 leading BC's security commisioners; TAlor, SHirras, and Mea.

The war caused a large labor shortage for farmers, especially sugar beet farmers. The Security Commission Council organized sugar beet projects to combat the labor shortage. This gave the Japanese males a choice. The choice was to work in road camps as slaves or go to the beet camps and be with their families. Working in the beet camps was the choice taken by the majority of Japanese married men. Japanese Canadians were being punished for a crime they didn't commit. Canada's only defense for its actions was that Japanese people were not white and they "could" be Japanese spies. Innocent Japanese Canadians were stripped of their rights, issued special clothing, humiliated, thrown behind barbed wire fences, and were forced to do manual labor. Living in interment camps was a hard life to live. Many families were forced to live in cramped quarters with ten other families sharing one stove. Some camps such as Slocan city; didn't have the resources to house the huge amounts of people coming into the camps. Many Japanese were placed in tents until there were houses available. One would think that moving from a tent to a house would be a step up, but this was not true. Most houses consisted of panel board with no insulation, rickety walls and maybe a stove. During the harsh cold winters many Japanese put lanterns under their beds to try and keep warm. Life in relocation periods has been reported in her auto-biographic novel by Joy Kogawa.

In the years that followed, the Japanese Internees were able to make the camps feel more like home. They petitioned the Royal Commission for better housing and more stoves. After the Japanese petitioned and protested the Government allowed a few changes. Families were able to grow vegetable gardens, dig basements and create extra rooms. Japanese internees continued on with life, putting on festivals and musical events. The BC Government refused to fund education for young Japanese Canadians. Then the Federal Government stepped in and helped out the Japanese and arranged classes from grades 1-10. With the help of the Roman Catholic Church, the Anglican Church, and the United Church high school became a reality so grades 11-12 came into effect as well. The first place to get a school up and running was in Lemon Creek. Before the bombing of Pearl Harbor, young Japanese Canadians were allowed to enroll in the Canadian Army. Once the bombing occurred, the BC Government would not allow the Japanese Canadians to enroll into the army. Some Japanese Canadians decided to fight for the British, this made the BC Government change their minds.

Many of Nisei had volunteered for the Canadian Army. But they have been refused till finally the British got desperate and sent a man out from England to see if they could recruit Nisei. So that’s fine, if they can't go as a Canadian they will go in British uniform. So they joined up in the British Pioneer Corps as corporals. They were going to go overseas, and dammit, they waited and waited and nothing happened! They found out there was a terrific wrangle in Parliament that says can't-they can't go overseas in foreign uniforms! And apparently during the debate somebody got the bright idea, if they're going to go, they're going in Canadian uniforms. So at the last minute they changed their mind and demoted us to privates in Canadian Intelligence and we went over-seas. They said, what's the matter with you, are you crazy? "They've taken away everything you own, moved you by force out of the place you lived at and insulted you in every way possible-and you're going to go and take some more of it?" An even bigger insult occured to the Canadian born Japanese. Canada sold all of their worldly possessions. In 1943 the Canadian "Custodian of Aliens" liquidated these worldly possessions without the owner's permission. The Custodian of Aliens held auctions for these items. These items would range from farms and to houses, to people's clothing.

They were sold quickly and prices were insultingly cheap. The money that was raised from these auctions went to the realtors and the auctioneers; then it went to paying for storage and the handling charges. The Japanese had to pay for their stay at these horrid camps. While under the Geneva Convention prisoners of war (POW) didn't have to pay for their camps. In comparison to what the American Government paid for their internment camps, Canada paid a quarter of what the USA did. In 1944, with an election coming up, King re-instated the fear of Japanese in BC. Even after saying in August 1944: "it is a fact no person of Japanese race born in Canada has been charged with any act of sabotage or disloyalty during the years at war", King still passed the law stating that the Japanese could be deported to Japan if they did not leave BC. This was called "repatriatism". People could be deported to Japan even if they were not of Japanese origin. Those Japanese who moved east to get away from deportation were prohibited to buy land; they had to lease land, and to grow crops they needed special licenses. These licenses were upheld until April 1946. Some Japanese Canadians signed papers stating they would leave Canada after the war was over. Of the 22 000 Japanese Canadians placed in the internment camps, 4 000 were stripped of their Canadian citizenship and then deported to Japan. Then after the war, 6 000 people were sent over to Japan.

In 1945 the deportation orders were contested in the BC Supreme Court. Justice Manson dismissed the case on a technicality, ruling that because the Security Commission had since dissolved, no suit could be brought against it. In 1946, the government upheld the Security Commission's decision to deport Japanese Canadians to Japan. In 1988, 46 years after the first Japanese Internment Camps, Canadian Japanese were apologized and compensated for all that they had endured during the war. Prime Minister Brian Mulroney signed a compensation package giving $21 000 for each internee's survivor. In total 12 million dollars were paid out. Ten internment camps and 68 years later, Canada is still paying for what it did to fellow Japanese Canadians. Despite their race, they were still Canadian citizens, but Canada chose not to recognize them as equals just because of the war. Many believed that the internment camps were manifested out of British Columbian's hatred for the Japanese.

Lets hope that generations to come can learn from our mistakes, our ignorance, and realize that just because something comes in a different color or a different shape doesn't mean it is bad, or that it is wrong.

Takima (talk) 15:31, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

"justified" is ambigious[edit]

"The internment began in December 1941, following the attack by the Japanese air force on the American base at Pearl Harbour, Hawaii and was justified on grounds of national security."

In this sentence, the word "justified" would mean one of two things:

  1. those demanding/organizing the interment believed and/or claimed it was necessary for national security (but may have been incorrect)
  2. they did so, and they were correct in that assumption

This should be clarified.

Similarly, the sentence in the "Internment/Isolation Camps" section:

"Prime Minister Mackenzie King decided to intern Japanese Canadian citizens based on speculative evidence, because both the RCMP and defense department lacked proof of any sabotage or espionage."

"Lacked proof" suggests that that they believed it, but could not prove it. My understanding is that both the RCMP and Defense Department specifically denounced the accusations as unfounded.

- TheMightyQuill (talk) 20:09, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

Added citation requests[edit]

Added several citation requests, many of the claims made seem to be accurate, but absolutely need to be sourced and cited or they come across as EXTREMELY POV. I'm not saying they aren't true, or accurate, but the citations are absolutely necessary for such claims to avoid POV accusations.

How did the BC government know which households were Japanese owned? My first guess is the census data but if someone can clarify, thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.54.97.130 (talk) 22:42, 21 January 2010 (UTC)


This arcticle is all kinds of wrong, it's POV and narrative - totally "unencyclopaedic". nihil (talk) 22:23, 23 January 2011 (UTC)

I have removed Salmo BC, Canada as an internment as I have verified with long time residents and families that there was never such a camp. We did have Japanese workers here at a sawmill at the turn of the century and apparently that was confused by some people. I do recommend requiring census data etc as the Salmo BC article claimed the citizens (myself being one) were not recognizing the site, which is of course ridiculous because there was no site and it was based purely on rumor. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ian6195712 (talkcontribs) 04:09, 13 September 2013 (UTC)

Canada's academia may better provide further elaboration on this topic.[edit]

That is, after reading through several websites related to this topic, I as a European outsider am seriously disappointed, in fact almost outraged about how Canada handled and is still handling this dark part of their history compared to their neighbours in the South: The fact that there are still strong debates ongoing on webpages about prominent Canadian politicians like Mackenzie-King with entries deleted and reedited and what is more, that there is little information and evidence in general, shows first and foremost that Canadians cared and still care little about it and that alone weights far more than the crime or apology thereafter. What's it worth to condemn or apologise without wanting to know what actually happened? Historical Aufarbeitung as the Germans did comes first and foremost. This is not as much a political as a civic issue every citizen and its academic members in particular are responsible for. That is the truly outrageous part in the whole story.

"Historiography"[edit]

Flagged section for cleanup. This entire section feels like a high-school essay that was copied and pasted...some information is repeated elsewhere in the article, none of the section is linked, the grammar is rather poor, and the writing style is not up to par. Also, I don't think it in any way qualifies as actual "historiography..." I suspect the author thought it sounded like a cool word. Please, someone who actually knows the topic...take a look and see if any of this should even stay up. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.175.22.237 (talk) 13:21, 1 December 2012 (UTC)

This section appears to be an attempt to prove the Canadian government was unjustly racist. It has nothing to do with historiography, and I agree that it should be removed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.228.26.218 (talk) 02:17, 19 December 2012 (UTC)

Which Bomb?[edit]

“Prior to the dropping of the bomb, Prime Minister King was not considered a racist.” (Under Mackenzie King's attitudes) Can we clarify which bomb? Maybe one with a link? --Lord Don-Jam (talk) 16:37, 3 May 2013 (UTC)

re new expansion[edit]

Re this it's not just the Japanese immigrants who were resented; Yugoslavs and Italians who came over as refugees during the War had taken up work also, and their numbers were similar and maybe greater.Skookum1 (talk) 03:55, 16 March 2014 (UTC)`

This is quite true. I unfortunately did not see it mentioned a whole lot in the sources listed (as they focused on the Japanese) but I have added a mention of them into the paragraph on World War I. Does that seem fairer now? Piemanthe3rd (talk) 07:24, 16 March 2014 (UTC)

Legislature/legislation[edit]

Whoever wrote this doesn't know the difference between a legislature (law-making body, such as parliament) and legislation (laws). I've corrected this twice.213.127.210.95 (talk) 15:25, 9 August 2015 (UTC)

Public School Addition[edit]

As an addition to the statement that the apology to Japanese Canadians created a reform in society, I have mentioned the use of the public school system as an outlet to encourage community involvement and acceptance of the past. Through this system wronged individuals were able to share their stories and create a more connected and supportive community.Sarah.Monk (talk) 05:11, 23 January 2016 (UTC)

Creating Japanese Canadian history page?[edit]

Reviewing the Japanese Canadian internment page, there is a large section on pre-war history that is not directly relevant to internment, though sets important context. Could there be enough info to create a separate page on Japanese Canadian history to house this material and provide room for expansion? Penandparchment (talk) 21:15, 24 January 2017 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Japanese-Canadian internment. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

You may set the |checked=, on this template, to true or failed to let other editors know you reviewed the change. If you find any errors, please use the tools below to fix them or call an editor by setting |needhelp= to your help request.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

If you are unable to use these tools, you may set |needhelp=<your help request> on this template to request help from an experienced user. Please include details about your problem, to help other editors.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:26, 19 April 2017 (UTC)

  1. ^ Justice in Our Time: The Japanese Canadian Redress Settlement, Talonbooks, 1991, pp.22-23.