Thanks for responding to my response. :)

I think there’s a big difference between “Chinese Americans working for the federal government” to “the entirety of society.” Also, there’s a big difference between being fired and being interred. To say it’s equivalent sounds to me like those apologists who try to equate indentured servitude of the Irish in America in the 1600’s to the chattel slavery of Africans 100 years later.

The other issue is one that I think Americans are far more advanced than the rest of the world, which is understanding that ethnicity does not determine, culture, language, or beliefs.

Finally, the whole frame of continuity is off. If someone wrote an article today about how Italy or Germany are about to start rounding up minority X and putting them into concentration camps, they could cherry pick comments about migrants or maybe use Berlusconi’s comment about Barack Obama being “very tan” as being proof that fascism was about to rear it’s ugly head in 2017. People would be pissed off. It would be a denial of all of the growth that Italy and Germany went through over the past 70 years and it would be ridiculous. Yes, technically, the supreme court never overturned the decision, but there was an official apology by Ronald Reagan, compensation, museums.

That’s my big problem with this article, and why it read wrong to me, and why I felt compelled to respond. Not that Chinese Americans wouldn’t face some sort of hardship and suspicion in the event of a US China war. Of course, there would be some. Obviously. But the article ignored what form that suspicion and official reprisal, if any, was likely to take in the 21st century and instead the bulk of the article was focused on internment which is not on the table. I want to hear more about the people fired and harassed, or the people having their identity questioned. That seems much more relevant and predictive.