Analysis of the Essay Example: Japanese Internment Camps

This essay provides a detailed examination of the internment of Japanese Americans during World War II, arguing that it was a significant historical mistake. The analysis below breaks down its structure, argumentation, use of evidence, and potential areas for revision.

Structure and Organization

The essay follows a logical, chronological, and thematic structure, making it easy to follow the progression of the argument. It begins with an introduction that clearly states the thesis: the internment was a profound mistake rooted in racism and wartime hysteria. The body paragraphs then develop this argument by exploring key aspects of the event. The essay moves from the pre-war context of anti-Japanese sentiment to the immediate aftermath of Pearl Harbor and the implementation of Executive Order 9066. It then discusses the legal justifications, the experiences of the internees, the lasting consequences, and concludes with a reflection on the lessons learned. This organization allows for a comprehensive overview and a persuasive presentation of the case against internment.

  • Introduction: Sets the stage and presents the thesis.
  • Historical Context: Discusses pre-war prejudice.
  • Wartime Hysteria & Policy: Explains the impact of Pearl Harbor and Executive Order 9066.
  • Legal Justifications: Examines court cases and their outcomes.
  • Human Cost: Details the experiences of internees.
  • Long-Term Consequences: Discusses the aftermath and struggle for redress.
  • Conclusion: Summarizes the argument and offers reflections.

Thesis and Argumentation

The central thesis is clearly articulated in the introduction: "the internment of over 110,000 individuals of Japanese ancestry... represented a profound abdication of constitutional principles and a grievous moral failing." The essay consistently supports this claim by framing the internment not as an unavoidable wartime measure but as a "deliberate, albeit misguided, policy rooted in xenophobia and fear." The argument is persuasive because it connects the policy to underlying prejudice, highlights the discriminatory application of laws, and contrasts the treatment of Japanese Americans with other ethnic groups. The essay effectively argues that the internment was a mistake based on flawed reasoning and prejudice, rather than genuine national security needs.

Use of Evidence and Detail

The essay effectively integrates specific details and historical references to support its claims. It mentions key figures like Lieutenant General John L. DeWitt and President Franklin D. Roosevelt, and cites crucial legal documents and court cases such as Executive Order 9066, Hirabayashi v. United States, and Korematsu v. United States. The description of the "assembly centers" and "relocation centers" (e.g., Manzanar, Topaz) with details about cramped barracks and communal latrines adds significant weight to the discussion of the human cost. The mention of the Civil Liberties Act of 1988 and the government's apology provides concrete evidence of the eventual acknowledgment of the "grave injustice." This blend of legal, political, and personal details strengthens the essay's credibility and impact.

Tone and Style

The tone is academic, critical, and reflective. It maintains a serious and respectful approach to the subject matter, avoiding overly emotional language while still conveying the gravity of the injustice. Phrases like "profound abdication of constitutional principles," "grievous moral failing," and "explicitly racist framing" convey a strong critical stance. The language is precise and formal, suitable for an academic essay. The essay uses contractions sparingly, maintaining a professional tone. The sentence structure varies, incorporating both shorter, declarative sentences and longer, more complex ones to maintain reader engagement.

Revision Opportunities and Further Development

While the essay is strong, several areas could be further developed to enhance its depth and impact. Expanding on the experiences of specific individuals or families could add a more personal dimension. For instance, including a brief anecdote or quote from a survivor could powerfully illustrate the human cost. Further exploration of the legal arguments used in the Supreme Court cases, perhaps detailing the dissenting opinions or the specific legal reasoning that was later overturned, could strengthen the critique of the judicial system's role. Additionally, a more explicit comparison with the treatment of German and Italian Americans, beyond a brief mention, could further underscore the discriminatory nature of Executive Order 9066. Finally, while the conclusion reflects on lessons learned, it could benefit from more specific contemporary parallels or a more detailed discussion of how the legacy of internment continues to inform discussions on civil rights and national security today.

Example of a More Detailed Anecdote (Revision Suggestion)

Consider the story of the Tanaka family, who owned a thriving flower farm in California. Within weeks of Executive Order 9066, they were forced to sell their land and equipment for a fraction of its value. Mrs. Tanaka recalled the shame and confusion of being herded onto a bus with her children, leaving behind a life built over two decades. 'We were Americans,' she later recounted, 'but suddenly, we were treated like invaders. The fear in my children's eyes was the hardest to bear.' This personal narrative, if woven into the section on human cost, would offer a visceral understanding of the disruption and trauma inflicted by the internment policy, moving beyond statistical impact to individual suffering.

Checklist for Analyzing Historical Essays

  • Does the essay have a clear thesis statement?
  • Is the thesis statement arguable and specific?
  • Does the introduction provide necessary context?
  • Does the essay follow a logical organizational pattern?
  • Are topic sentences used effectively to guide paragraphs?
  • Is evidence used to support claims?
  • Is the evidence relevant and credible?
  • Are sources properly cited (if applicable)?
  • Does the conclusion summarize the main points and restate the thesis?
  • Does the conclusion offer further reflection or implications?
  • Is the tone appropriate for the subject matter?
  • Is the language clear, precise, and academic?
  • Are there any grammatical errors or typos?

This example essay offers several valuable lessons for students approaching similar historical analysis assignments. It demonstrates how to construct a compelling argument by framing a historical event as a "mistake" or "injustice." The essay's strength lies in its ability to connect abstract policy decisions to concrete human experiences and to underlying societal factors like prejudice. Students can learn from its structured approach, moving from context to policy, impact, and conclusion. The integration of legal and personal details highlights the importance of varied evidence. Finally, the essay's reflective conclusion underscores the enduring relevance of historical events and the need to draw lessons for the present.