The Making of Asian America: A History

Nonfiction | Book | Adult | Published in 2015

A modern alternative to SparkNotes and CliffsNotes, SuperSummary offers high-quality Study Guides with detailed chapter summaries and analysis of major themes, characters, and more.

Download PDF

Summary

Background

Chapter Summaries & Analyses

Introduction, Part 1, Chapters 1-2

Part 2, Chapters 3-4

Part 2, Chapters 5-6

Part 2, Chapters 7-9

Part 3, Chapters 10-12

Part 4, Chapters 13-14

Part 4, Chapters 15-16

Part 5, Chapter 17-Epilogue

Key Figures

Themes

Index of Terms

Important Quotes

Essay Topics

Themes

Empire, Colonialism, and Asian Immigration

Empire, Colonialism, and Asian Immigration is one of the key themes for Erika Lee. Between the 16th and 20th centuries, European, American, and Japanese imperialism shaped Asian immigration to the Americas. It contributed to the socioeconomic conditions for immigration in Asia, impacted labor conditions in the Americas, and even had an effect on the way the Asian immigrants were treated in their new homes.

First, the author describes the Spanish Empire, which used the Philippines as a hub in its Transpacific slave trade. Asians from diverse places, such as present-day India and Myanmar, represented a smaller group compared to Africans. However, they were used in the same way in the Spanish Empire in the Americas. The journeys overseas were difficult and had a high death toll from diseases. The labor was backbreaking. Overall, the Spanish Empire relied on its colonial possessions to transport human capital where it was necessary for labor.

Second, the British Empire operated in a similar way by transporting laborers from one part of its vast landmass to another, especially to the Caribbean. However, since the gradual abolition of slavery in the first third of the 19th century, it relied on the indentured labor of “coolies” (See: Index of Terms) who were free in name only. Their journeys were equally dangerous, and some were taken against their will. Coolies also worked in often terrible conditions and without the ability to leave after their contracts expired. The author argues that “the Chinese coolie system prompted a global debate over race and labor” in the second half of the 19th century by impacting Chinese immigration and leading to negative Chinese stereotypes (53).

Meanwhile, the forced British importation of opium into China, the subsequent colonial Opium Wars (1839-42, 1856-60), Unequal Treaties (1842), territorial loss of Hong Kong, and a “Century of Humiliation” (as it is called in China) also contributed to the socioeconomic conditions that pushed some Chinese people to emigrate. British colonialism also created the negative stereotype of the “backward” Chinese, frequently depicted with an opium pipe. Finally, being British subjects did not help South Asian immigrants in Canada: Their race trumped their status, as Canada, a self-governing British colony, used the Continuous Journey law to prevent them from entering.

Third, in the late 19th century, the Spanish-American War (1898) marked a key turning point for American imperialism and formal colonization. Lee writes, “US colonial and military occupations and engagements” shaped Asian immigration in the first half of the 20th century (4). In addition to Guam and Puerto Rico, the United States purchased the Philippines from the vanquished and collapsing Spanish Empire. American colonial conquest was accompanied by a brutal war against the native population in the early 1900s. The author describes the way the Filipinos were perceived “in racial terms as uncivilized savages, brutal rapists, and even dogs and monkeys” (175). On the other end of the spectrum, some Americans viewed the Filipinos as “children” incapable of governing themselves. This type of paternalism prevented Filipinos from becoming full citizens—only US Nationals—and the US did not grant them independence until 1946.

Finally, Japan plays a special role in this framework. On the one hand, Japanese immigrants to the Americas were mistreated and faced discrimination and exclusion like the other Asian groups. On the other, Japan was itself an empire in the first half of the 20th century. As a result, Japan annexed Korea between 1910 and 1945 as a formal colony. This territorial expansion meant that the Korean immigrants in the US were essentially stateless.

In turn, Korean Americans displayed “a fierce nationalism that focused on Korean independence” (145). Korean Americans’ classification as Japanese “subjects” created problems for them, especially when they were categorized as “enemy aliens” like the Japanese during World War II. At that time, the Japanese invasion of China and the Philippines also improved the domestic perception of the Chinese and Filipinos as American Allies. Overall, despite the differences between the imperial rule of Spain, Britain, the US, and Japan, the overall impact of their imperialism on their respective subjects remained significant and shaped their lives in many ways.

Asian Immigration in the Framework of Race, Gender, and Class

Erika Lee uses an intersectional approach in analyzing the socioeconomic trends in Asian immigration to the Americas by focusing on sex/gender, race, and class. This methodology allows the author to examine the interactions between these key forms of identity that framed the immigrant experience of societal prejudice, institutional discrimination, and resilience. This methodology also serves to understand the diverse Asian group to a greater extent. After all, this practice of “simultaneous lumping together of diverse Asians into one homogenous group” has historical roots (6). By using intersectionality, the author challenges this grouping and, at the same time, acknowledges their shared immigrant experience.

The period between the 19th and early 20th centuries shows the way in which race, class, and sex/gender often worked against Asian American immigrants. At this time, Asian Americans faced societal racism, legal discrimination, and even racial violence. Labor immigration on the lower end of the economic spectrum until the early 20th century was overwhelmingly male. Whether coolies working within the British Empire on the plantations or guano islands or the railroad laborers in the US and Canada, Asian men fled from their countries of origin for relatively better opportunities abroad.

In many cases, these working-class men were unable to return due to the lack of funds should the opportunities fail, or because the situation at home was even worse. These men were also unable to marry due to anti-miscegenation laws, for instance, in the US. As a result, they used the picture-bride matchmaking system to obtain young wives in their countries of origin. In some cases, the women were deceived because the men were older and less attractive and affluent than they had presented themselves to be.

In North America, these women faced a difficult life of both working alongside their husbands and performing their duties at home to fulfill the traditional gender norms. Despite working alongside men, these women lacked equal rights: Their ability to stay in the United States was “linked to their husband’s or father’s immigrant status” (7). On the other end of the spectrum were male laborers who worked in domestic services, such as cleaning, and who were perceived to be doing “women’s work.” Exclusion laws also halted social mobility afforded to other immigrant groups: For instance, first-generation Japanese Americans could not purchase land.

The period after the middle of the 20th century in US history was one of social advancement, after a series of laws repealed Asian Exclusion and liberalized immigration and first-generation naturalization. These included the Magnuson Act, the Luce-Celler Act, and the Immigration and Nationality Acts of 1952 and 1965 (See: Index of Terms). At the same time, women’s liberation was an important societal trend at this time within the broader framework of civil rights. These transformations brought with them greater social mobility, healthy assimilation, and more equal gender roles for Asian Americans. Some Asians attained significant success and began to be called “model minorities,” sometimes even viewed as competing with whites. Despite these advancements, the 2010 census revealed that Asian Americans were overrepresented on both ends of the economic spectrum.

After World War II, gender norms were also challenged in subtler ways. One group of Asian Americans comprised military wives from Japan and Korea. Some of these women found it difficult to adjust to life in the US, including gender values that were relatively less patriarchal than in their countries of origin. After 1975, the Hmong immigrants experienced similar challenges. The author describes their culture as deeply clannish and patriarchal, which made the undermining of traditional gender roles difficult: “[S]ome Hmong men […] found their ability to support their families—and with it, their authority and sense of selves—changed and diminished” (336). Some industries remained gendered, as was the case with Filipino women working in domestic service or healthcare. Racist stereotypes did not disappear either, as immigrants like the Hmong were depicted as “primitive and backward peoples” (337).

In the early 21st century, race, sex/gender, and class relate to each other in new ways. The author describes “flexible citizens” who reside between at least two countries, with intact families living in separation. They use this method to maintain ties with their present home and ancestral homeland simultaneously, and to improve educational and professional opportunities. Overall, the interplay between race, sex/gender, and class remains a potent way of understanding the Asian American experience.

The Impact of Immigration Law on Asian Americans

The impact of immigration law and related legislation, as well as international agreements, on Asian Americans is the third key theme for Erika Lee. Immigration law was shaped by domestic labor conditions, international relations, societal values, and public opinion. Ultimately, it was these laws that either included or excluded Asian Americans from the United States and Canada. A related category comprises the Supreme Court rulings in cases where Asian Americans attempted to obtain naturalized citizenship or defend their civil rights as US citizens. The author differentiates between two general periods in immigration law as it relates to Asian Americans.

The first period is the Exclusion Era from the late 19th century until the middle of the 20th century, with World War II acting as a watershed moment. The 1882 Chinese Exclusion Act prohibited Chinese immigration to the US but allowed exceptions for certain classes, such as merchants. A decade later, the Geary Act extended these exclusion laws. In 1904, exclusion became permanent. A 1908 Gentlemen’s Agreement between the US and Japan, and Canada and Japan, also banned Japanese labor immigration. Until 1923, Canada relied on a head tax on Chinese immigrants that many laborers could not afford.

The 1917 Barred Zone Act and the 1924 Immigration Act represented the most aggressive Asian immigration prohibition and the pinnacle of this era. The purpose of exclusion was to limit labor immigration from East Asia, even though it comprised a smaller percentage of the overall labor immigration from other parts of the world, especially Europe. The legislation was, in part, inspired by outdated racial and cultural views and the propaganda concept of “Yellow Peril.” Banning East Asian laborers opened a space for undocumented immigration and the extensive underground, money-making networks facilitating it.

The second period began in the mid-20th century and lasted into the early 21st century, marking gradual immigration liberalization in the broader framework of civil rights and women’s liberation of the 1960s and beyond. As attitudes toward the Chinese changed during World War II because China was an ally, the 1943 Magnuson Act repealed Chinese Exclusion and allowed some Chinese people in the US to obtain naturalized citizenship.

Following the 1946 Luce-Celler Act, it was the Filipinos’ and South Asians’ turn to naturalize, since both groups were also US allies during the war. The 1952 Immigration and Nationality Act allowed Japanese and Koreans to become naturalized US citizens. The most sweeping immigration reform came with the 1965 Immigration and Nationality Act, which liberalized immigration requirements and diversified immigration to the US. It is this legislation that remains in effect in the 21st century.

Next, the Supreme Court cases such as United States v. Wong Kim Ark (1898) and United States v. Bhagat Singh Thind (1923) defined and challenged the notion of citizenship. Wong Kim Ark was denied reentry to the US based on Chinese Exclusion, yet he was deemed a citizen because he was born to immigrant parents in California. However, the 1922 Ozawa v. United States and the 1923 United States v. Bhagat Singh Thind did not allow these first-generation Asian immigrants to naturalize. Following Thind’s case, other South Asians were stripped of naturalized US citizenship. These cases show that citizenship was determined based on the place of birth, but naturalization was denied based on race.

Finally, there are the World War II Supreme Court decisions regarding the civil rights of citizens. Hirabayashi v. United States (1943) and Korematsu v. United States (1944) upheld the convictions of US citizens of Japanese descent, Gordon Hirabayashi and Fred Korematsu, respectively, for breaking the curfews defined by Executive Order 9066. The Supreme Court deemed “military necessity” more important than citizenship rights. It was not until 40 years later that, in Korematsu’s case, the conviction was overturned.

The civil rights activism of Japanese Americans like Korematsu eventually paved the way for the Civil Liberties Act (1988), which offered an official apology for the forced relocation and imprisonment of Japanese Americans and reparations. These cases also demonstrate the continued and evolving importance of civil rights.