lthough Truman toned down his racist expressions after entering the White House in 1945, he continued to use racial slurs in private conversation for the rest of his life, said William Leuchtenburg, president of the American Historical Association.
Leuchtenburg, a University of North Carolina professor, is writing a book on Truman.
In 1911, the year he turned 27, Truman wrote to his future wife, Bess: "I think one man is just as good as another so long as he's honest and decent and not a nigger or a Chinaman. Uncle Will says that the Lord made a white man from dust, a nigger from mud, then He threw up what was left and it came down a Chinaman."
"(Uncle Will) does hate Chinese and Japs," Truman continued. "So do I. It is race prejudice, I guess. But I am strongly of the opinion Negroes ought to be in Africa, yellow men in Asia and white men in Europe and America."
When a racist decides to nuke a non-white group of people, do we (a) applaud him, (b) admit that it was tragic while quickly scurrying for mythic justifications, or (c) condemn him?
Many Americans will opt for (a), and nearly all will opt for (b).
But really, Harry Truman makes the KKK look like clowns.
BigBallinStalin wrote:When a racist decides to nuke a non-white group of people, do we (a) applaud him, (b) admit that it was tragic while quickly scurrying for mythic justifications, or (c) condemn him?
Many Americans will opt for (a), and nearly all will opt for (b).
But really, Harry Truman makes the KKK look like clowns.
BBS, how does the element of Civilian status vs non-Civilian status of the nuke recipients factor into your 3 choices?!?>!
President Woodrow Wilson was a huge racist as well. The first movie ever screened at the White house was supposedly "The Birth of A Nation" which has been credited with helping increase the membership in the KKK during it's time.
Maybe we need a poll on this one...Who was the most racist president in USA history.
throw President Lyndon Johnson on that poll as well, he was a huge racist!
BigBallinStalin wrote:When a racist decides to nuke a non-white group of people, do we (a) applaud him, (b) admit that it was tragic while quickly scurrying for mythic justifications, or (c) condemn him?
Many Americans will opt for (a), and nearly all will opt for (b).
But really, Harry Truman makes the KKK look like clowns.
It's unclear
How much the nuking decision was influenced by the racism, and
whether Truman was making a decision, or just following through on what was accepted doctrine.
As I wrote in my History of Nuclear War II tournament,
Dukasaur wrote:With Germany and Italy out of the war, Japan continued to fight, and nuclear bombs were preparared for use against Japan.
There are those who say that Germany's exit from the war simplified the decision to use the bomb -- that use of such a terrible weapon was made easier by the fact that it was to be used against Asians rather than Europeans. It is unclear how true this allegation might be.
On the one hand, Allied air forces certainly weren't gentle with Germany. Over 3,000,000 tons of conventional bombs had been dropped on Europe, resulting in a million German casualties (1/4 of a million dead and 3/4 of a million injured) and probably another 300,000 casualties in German-occupied areas of other countries. On the other hand, it is true that there were racist overtones to the war against Japan that weren't present in the against Germany. In both the U.S. and Canada, Japanese citizens were interned, while German and Italian citizens were assumed to be loyal unless proven otherwise.
During the war "annihilationist and exterminationalist rhetoric" was tolerated at all levels of U.S. society; according to the UK embassy in Washington the Americans regarded the Japanese as "a nameless mass of vermin".[90] Caricatures depicting Japanese as less than human, e.g. monkeys, were common.[90] A 1944 opinion poll that asked what should be done with Japan found that 13% of the U.S. public were in favor of the extermination of all Japanese: men, women, and children.[91][92]
In Australia, the entire British stockpile of poison gas leftover from WW I was brought in, to be used if Japanese forces successfully landed on Australian soil. This was "justified" because Japan had never signed the Geneva Conventions and was not protected by the ban on poison gas.
“Life is a shipwreck, but we must not forget to sing in the lifeboats.” ― Voltaire
BigBallinStalin wrote:When a racist decides to nuke a non-white group of people, do we (a) applaud him, (b) admit that it was tragic while quickly scurrying for mythic justifications, or (c) condemn him?
Many Americans will opt for (a), and nearly all will opt for (b).
But really, Harry Truman makes the KKK look like clowns.
BBS, how does the element of Civilian status vs non-Civilian status of the nuke recipients factor into your 3 choices?!?>!
--Andy
Easy. I'll invoke the Truman Doctrine: "they're all a bunch of god damn Japs! Nuke 'em!"
How much the nuking decision was influenced by the racism, and
whether Truman was making a decision, or just following through on what was accepted doctrine.
First of all, let's remember that there was always an asymmetric hatred relationship against the enemy from Japan as opposed to the enemy from Germany. This level was so great that after the war, long before political correctness set in to the media, most of the anti-Japan propaganda cartoons were quickly suppressed. Everyone remembers the lady with the rolled sleeve ... do you know about these ones ... 10 Most Xenophobic Pieces of Anti-Japanese Wartime Propaganda. Even Dr. Seuss joined in the hatred.
A commonly held view was that the Japanese were subhuman or evolutionarily inferior. It was an all too common idea among not only the Americans but among the other Allies as well. British Under-Secretary of the Foreign Office Sir Alexander Cadogan referred to the Japanese as “little yellow dwarf slaves” referring to the average height difference between Anglos and Japanese (Aldrich 64). Chiefs of Staff felt “no reason to believe that Japanese standards are even comparable with those of the Italians.” In one of the most famous, and perhaps most fantastic and blatant misconceptions of the Japanese, historian Arthur Marder thought the Japanese to be inherently inferior, especially in the art of war, for several reasons, one being “because of their eye slits… the Japanese fighter pilots could not shoot straight, and Japanese naval officers could not see in the dark” (65). Captain Vivian from Tokyo said that Japanese were incapable of springing surprise in battle because they have “peculiarly slow brains” (64). One needs only to obviously site the bombing of Pearl Harbor to disclaim that notion. Despite this, the West was still convinced during the early part of the war that Japan was of Japan’s inherently inferior.
Thus it is incredibly hard to argue that Truman wasn't racist in this regard because EVERYONE in the war effort was to one degree or another.
How much the nuking decision was influenced by the racism, and
whether Truman was making a decision, or just following through on what was accepted doctrine.
First of all, let's remember that there was always an asymmetric hatred relationship against the enemy from Japan as opposed to the enemy from Germany. This level was so great that after the war, long before political correctness set in to the media, most of the anti-Japan propaganda cartoons were quickly suppressed. Everyone remembers the lady with the rolled sleeve ... do you know about these ones ... 10 Most Xenophobic Pieces of Anti-Japanese Wartime Propaganda. Even Dr. Seuss joined in the hatred.
A commonly held view was that the Japanese were subhuman or evolutionarily inferior. It was an all too common idea among not only the Americans but among the other Allies as well. British Under-Secretary of the Foreign Office Sir Alexander Cadogan referred to the Japanese as “little yellow dwarf slaves” referring to the average height difference between Anglos and Japanese (Aldrich 64). Chiefs of Staff felt “no reason to believe that Japanese standards are even comparable with those of the Italians.” In one of the most famous, and perhaps most fantastic and blatant misconceptions of the Japanese, historian Arthur Marder thought the Japanese to be inherently inferior, especially in the art of war, for several reasons, one being “because of their eye slits… the Japanese fighter pilots could not shoot straight, and Japanese naval officers could not see in the dark” (65). Captain Vivian from Tokyo said that Japanese were incapable of springing surprise in battle because they have “peculiarly slow brains” (64). One needs only to obviously site the bombing of Pearl Harbor to disclaim that notion. Despite this, the West was still convinced during the early part of the war that Japan was of Japan’s inherently inferior.
Thus it is incredibly hard to argue that Truman wasn't racist in this regard because EVERYONE in the war effort was to one degree or another.
That's not a well-founded conclusion. It's also so vague that it becomes meaningless: "to one degree or another."
E.g. here's a few prominent sexists and their writings and drawings. Therefore, everyone during this time was to one degree or another sexist.
chang50 wrote:When Truman was young lynchings were still commonplace in the us,I'd be really surprised to hear he and most of his contemparies weren't racist.
