A Message of Intolerance

The Cold War saw the U.S. wary of the influence of the Soviet Union. By the 1980s, Japan was seen as the new force for the U.S. to reckon with. As highlighted by the campaigns leading up to the recent elections, the latest common enemy of our country is China.

Unfortunately, xenophobic accusations, like those being lobbed against the Chinese, appeal to people and assuage their deepest fears more easily than facts and statistics. In the heyday of American trust in democracy following World War II, the fear of losing freedoms and liberty to Soviet encroachment led to a widespread anti-communist backlash; numerous individuals were blacklisted and ostracized within the U.S. In the 1970s and 80s, anti-Japanese anger permeated throughout popular culture, and over time tensions ignited into violence. In one infamous example, Vincent Chin, a Chinese-American mistaken to be Japanese, was murdered due to an environment of growing American outrage over auto-manufacturing jobs being outsourced to Japan. This, despite the reality that companies had moved offshore to reduce labor costs, so very few of the firings stemmed directly from Japanese competition.

Throughout the decades, political candidates and groups have readily proffered their patriotism and readiness to stand strong with Americans against “foreign devils” without a fuller understanding of the complexities that compose international relations. During this midterm-election cycle, an ad from Citizens Against Government Waste titled “Chinese Professor” elicited enough interest and donations to premiere on network television. The ad portrays a Chinese professor instructing a class in the year 2030 on the reasons behind the downfall of the U.S., highlighting “reckless” policies of the government in terms of spending. However, the message itself seems less about the woes of the government, than about China. The country is cast as the soon-to-be dominant force, smiling upon the misfortune of Americans who, according to the ad, “now work for us.”

Indeed, this election cycle has seen a number of anti-China ads like “Chinese Professor” from both sides of the aisle. However, such characterizations of China as a beneficiary and causative agent of a faltering U.S. have more harmful consequences on the American public than politicians might expect.

Using China as an impetus for action is fraught with “yellow peril,” a term which harkens back to past mistreatment of Chinese-Americans. The associations that become ingrained in the minds of the American public are rarely considered for their long-term impact. Politicians who capitalize on the innate fears of foreign dominance do so for the short-term goal of success at the polls; however, in doing so, they demonstrate their fecklessness in grappling with the very real issues that underlie a complex bilateral relationship. More dangerously, they unwittingly oil the gears of ignorance and prejudice, as American audiences perceive of a specific entity as the primary—and often only—threat to continued prosperity, when the truth dictates that a multitude of players and factors are at play.

A telling example from another perspective is the Chinese government’s recently allowing Chinese citizens to carry out anti-Japanese demonstrations over a territorial dispute, despite its traditional stance of opposing such activities (which are said to go against social stability). A near-daily Chinese media cycle that speaks disparagingly of the Japanese government has fueled such tensions over the years. Increasingly hostile Chinese demonstrators have smashed Japanese storefronts and cars, become violent with security forces, and in one instance have forced pedestrians to strip clothes that too closely “resembled a kimono.” The lack of violence against actual Japanese can be attributed to the largely homogenous nature of Chinese society, but in the U.S., where different ethnic groups co-exist, these tensions can easily manifest themselves into overt confrontations that can lead to unforgiveable outcomes.

Narrow-mindedly depicting China as a unilateral threat is not just a disservice to the realm of fact and reason. It also runs the risk of aggregating representations of the threat, namely Chinese and Asian Americans, with the threat itself. We would do well to learn from our past and present missteps. The strength of this nation’s cohesiveness must not be shattered by the misinformed, inflammatory message of the vocal few.

Byran N. Dai ’11, an inactive Crimson editorial writer, is a History and Science concentrator in Currier House.