The Overthrow of the War System/Chapter 6

Chapter VI

 

Race Problems of World Contact

 

By Ruby G. Smith, Ph.D.

 

Shanghai and New York are in closer touch to-day than were New York and Baltimore in 1800. Indeed, man's conquest of the natural barriers to his migration and communication, has so advanced that oceans connect rather than separate. Since civilization progresses by the mutual exchange of ideas, it is significant that international exchange of ideas and products has been multiplied more since Washington's day than in all previous history. The father of our country could travel no faster than could Abraham and Moses.

 

A world partnership

 

This contact of each part of the world with every other has transformed the American home within a few centuries from a log cabin to a cosmopolitan creation that may include Greek architecture, Persian rugs, South American coffee, African cooks, Chinese silks, German toys, Arctic furs, Japanese tea, Italian olives, Hawaiian sugar, and the art, music, news, and literature of the world. In short, we draw our daily resources from many lands, exacting tribute of other races for the most frugal meal and the humblest dwelling. Each nation barters what it can best produce for what it needs from others. Thus has been brought about, the planet around, an interdependent human society,—a world partnership.

This world partnership has economic, aesthetic, sociologic results; moreover, it has become vital to the existence of the world's large aggregations of population in cities. It is said that New York would succumb to famine in a week, were transportation cut off.

A partial severance of world contact of four stockholders in the world partnership occurred during the San Francisco fire, the Messina earthquake, the Ohio floods, and when Belgium became a battleground. Plague, famine and death were diverted from Belgium, Ohio, Messina and San Francisco by another form of cooperation—the altruistic—that sent a prompt response to the modernized cry of, "Come over into Macedonia and help us."

 

What are right relations for the races of men?

 

World contact has developed a knowledge and an interest between people of every nation. It has also brought mankind face to face with the problem of what are right relations for the varied races that were differentiated during their long isolation. For the period of isolation, when "East is East and West is West and never the twain shall meet," has passed away forever.

Do historical facts throw light on the question as to America's duty toward other races! History furnishes convincing evidence of the wrong way to solve the racial problem, and but little evidence of ways that are Christian and right. And since a question is never settled until it is settled right, but few of the racial problems of world contact have found solution because old formulas of government do not fit the modern, interdependent world. A few historic examples of the wrong way to handle race problems prove the need of new formulas better fitted to the realities of the modern world.

 

The ideal of empire

 

The historic ideal that has guided most of the relations between different races has been that of empire which seeks to prescribe for the world the domination of a single race and its type of civilization. This idea created the transitory empires of Babylon, Egypt, Persia, Rome and Napoleon. It still persists as a vestige of the past in the visionary Pan-Asiatic, Pan-Aryan, Pan-Slavic, and Pan-German empires. Some of the most restive products of this imperialistic formula of racial relations may be seen in the Balkan States whose artificial political frontiers are more closely related to the supposed interests of the European Powers than to the racial, lingual or religious affinities of the Balkan populations.

Repeated and dissimilar dissections of the Balkan peninsula have resulted in perhaps the most continuous and most tragic refugee movements in history. For each change of frontiers was followed by attempts to eradicate through conversion, banishment, or massacre all elements alien in religion or speech, no provision having been made, even when the Great Powers did the shuffling, for safe-guarding personal and property rights. Had the European Powers unselfishly and sincerely aided co-operation in the Balkans, and planned their organization in harmony with religious, language and racial cleavages, the European war might never have occurred.

 

Barriers of language and political frontiers

 

This same policy of politico-linguistic intolerance still pervades many imperialistic countries, applied to some extent in Poland, Finland, Alsace-Lorraine, Italia Irredenta, Schleswig, Bosnia, Herzegovina and the Power-made Albania. The futility of trying to crush out by force what is native and distinctive is demonstrated by the failures of Hungary to Magyarize Croatia, of Austria to Austrianize her imperial agglomeration of unrelated subjects, and of Germany to Germanize the French in Alsace-Lorraine, or the Poles in her slice of Poland. Europe has had more experience in meeting the race problem than any other continent, because of the proximity of the parts of Europe's mosaic of races. Space forbids discussion of our urgent Philippine problem which is not precisely a race problem. Its solution is independence of the islands, as speedily as may be, with protection through treaties of neutralization; friendly guidance through chosen foreign advisers and custom collectors; and fraternal instead of imperialistic or paternal help.

Were Europe freed of the curse of Babel, less would be heard of racial antagonisms, for language has become the chief distinguishing characteristic among Europeans, who are all Caucasians whose inter-marriage has largely swamped distinctive racial characteristics. In America, aided by a common tongue, all of the European varieties of men have found a common denominator.

 

The democratic solution

 

America's democratic policy regarding race differences is, with the exception of the negro problem, in sharp contrast with the imperialistic policy which has failed in Europe. Imperialism is based on the assumption of the right of the superior race to dominate. Democracy is based on the assumption of the fundamental equality of rights of all races, de- spite their superficial differences. The British Empire is a unit because England learned from our Revolution not to coerce Canada. Australia and New Zealand.

At the start, the United States defined for the world the only race-policy that fits the realities—that of the widest fraternal, rather than paternal, tolerance of human diversity—in the belief "that all men are created equal." This conception is a difficult one to apply to practical politics, and it is not surprising that the United States Government, with its changing personnel, has at times lost sight of this foundation principle.

 

Challenges of American democracy

 

The chief challenge of America's fraternal democracy came in the institution of slavery. The burning necessity to make valid our theoretical assertion of equality was abundantly and tragically shown in the story of America's Civil War. America vindicated her racial democracy by war,—the most costly, and uncertain method possible. Rationalism and good will, instead of armies and navies, must be mobilized for meeting the new challenge of American democracy,—the quickening Orient.

America has found that the Chinese, the Japanese, the Filipino, and other Asiatic people exhibit ability and character, and are generally equal and in some respects superior, except where specific training has been lacking. The races we do not like are the races we do not know.

 

Asiatic-American friendship

 

America has done much to merit the proverbial confidence of China. Li Hung Chang said, "While America was the only country of the world which denied admittance to our countrymen, it was also the only nation which stood like the Great Wall between China and dismemberment." It was our return of the Chinese indemnity, which was an over-payment, that set a new standard in international ethics. China has wisely used her restored indemnity for educating her youth in American universities where they rank as excellent students. Their high ideals and loyalty to the new republic inspire confidence that China will have wise leadership.

Dr. Jordan writes, "The Japanese everywhere feel toward America a peculiar, almost romantic gratitude. It was America who, in 1854, first opened Japan to the activities of the West. . . . It was America who led in the establishment of the Japanese school system and the great Imperial University of Tokio. . . . America is Japan's nearest and best friend among the nations, her guide and leader in paths which are new and strange."

 

Shall Asia and America succumb to military madness?

 

The United States can foster the friendship of China and Japan, by dealing rationally with misunderstandings that may rise between America and the Orient. Certain misunderstandings exist now that if allowed to ferment, may lead to oriental militarism that would divert resources from human progress and might, as in Europe, end in war and bankruptcy. A militarized Orient would lead us to huge expenditure in defense against it. Thoughts of China militarized stagger the imagination, for, as the sole survivor of ancient nations, because the non-military one. China's population has not been depleted by war and is vastly greater than that of any other race. Imagine a nation of more than three hundred millions forced by Christian civilization to arm when for more than nineteen centuries it had despised war! Shall America be apathetic in face of the appalling possibilities of the military example of Christendom?

 

State rights versus treaty rights

 

The chief existing cause for Asiatic antagonism is the failure of the United States to provide adequate legislation for fulfilling her treaty obligations. By treaty, the United States pledges herself to accord Orientals privileges in America that are accorded to "citizens of the most favored nation." China and Japan accord such privileges to Americans. By statute. Asiatics are denied naturalization and citizenship here. And because of the hazy delimitation of state rights, certain States have found technical grounds for discriminatory anti-Asiatic legislation. Examples of state legislation concerning a question of international scope are the Alien Land Laws of several States resembling those passed in California, against the protests of Japan and our federal government, in 1913. The yellow journals of California misrepresented her attitude toward the law by failing to report that many earnest citizens and state organizations opposed it. This temporarily solves a local problem in an unjust and impolitic way, but it may later threaten the peace of America and the Orient. Out of 11,000,000 acres of farm-land the Japanese owned only 13,000, yet statements were published and believed to the effect that the Japanese "owned and controlled in California fertile land equal to a strip five miles wide the entire length of the State."

The fact that the immigration problem in America is largely localized near ports of entry, suggests that fairness demands that means be provided whereby the burden of this question may be distributed over the United States. When our immigration laws are properly revised, no single State should receive an overload of aliens. These can be administered by a National Employment Bureau, acting as a distributing agency, which will determine each State's quota by stipulating annually in advance its maximum capacity for alien assimilation.

 

New immigration laws rather than new military defenses

 

Laws providing for federal control of aliens should be urged upon Congress by all loyal Americans. Discriminatory state-legislation and local mob-violence against aliens are the chief causes of our international misunderstandings. Foreign governments can have no relations with our separate States, yet hold the United States responsible for state violations of our treaties. Under our Constitution, no State can deal directly with another nation. All such powers are reserved to the federal government. All aliens are therefore wards, not of individual States, but of the United States. Presidents Harrison, McKinley, Roosevelt and Taft urged Congress to enact laws that would enable the ad- ministration to give aliens the care guaranteed by our treaties. No constitutional difficulty intervenes; yet no action has been taken. Ex-president Taft says such action would be more effective to prevent the possibility of war than would improving our military defenses.

 

Impartial immigration laws

 

It is urged that the preservation of American institutions be guaranteed by limiting immigration to the number who will readily assimilate our American ideals. But limitations must be universal and free from race discrimination. Standards for admission and citizenship can be raised as high as needed, but must be applied impartially to all races so that whoever qualifies individually can become an American; otherwise the sensitive Oriental nations may be deeply and dangerously embittered.

A third proposal, coming from Mr. Taft, is for federal control of aliens through registration and supervision during their preparation for citizenship. This provides restraint against lawlessness until admitted to citizenship which should be with an impressive ritual. Federal jurisdiction of aliens would tend to check mob violence and when it occurs, injustice by a jury in sympathy with the lynchers would no longer be possible.

 

The five per cent. idea

 

Prof. Sidney L. Gulick, for many years a missionary in Japan, proposes a plan which has great value. He says that since the best assimilative agency for immigrants "consists of those of the same nation that are already naturalized and know the languages, customs, ideals, political and social life of both peoples," therefore "all immigration should be limited to a definite per cent. per annum from each people, of those from that people already naturalized with American-born children of the first genera-ion. . . . Five per cent. suggests itself as a suitable rate with which to begin the experiment." With the present foreign-born population in America, this five per cent. plan would admit relatively few from southern Europe, and very few indeed from Japan. But being universal in application, the five per cent. plan commends itself as just to all. From the outcry made against Japanese in California one would imagine that they numbered at least a half-million, in that State alone, whereas in the whole country there are less than 100,000.

Professor Gulick says of Japan, "Her sense of national dignity is affronted. Japan regards as highly humiliating the proposals now before Congress in several forms to make general Asiatic exclusion laws. This situation is the more painful to her because until lately our relations have been so ideal. In spite of recent rebuffs and unkind words and treatment, there is a remarkable spirit of patience and moderation. But it can not be denied that her friendly feelings and her admiration for America have considerably cooled."

 

Japan's attitude

 

The assumption that Japan wants the Philippines has no foundation. The Japanese commission which examined the islands years ago reported that the climate prohibited successful colonization. It is doubtful whether Japan, whose interests are on the Continent, would care to accept them as a gift if she had the expense of fortifying them. Our own naval expense has been doubled in consequence of our Pacific possessions. The annual war-scare about Japan, which has flared up regularly just before the vote on naval appropriations, has been created by a few fanatics who wanted excuse for a huge navy.

 

How America might lead

 

America can set now a new international standard by showing that it is a one-sided policy to spend "millions for defense but not one cent" for the deliberate, systematic cultivation of the non-military defenses of just laws, international service and an intelligent under- standing. The price of one single torpedo- boat-destroyer would provide lectures on Oriental problems in every college; for exchange of visits of American and Asiatic statesmen and for wide newspaper publicity as to important facts which are little known. All this would largely allay trouble.

One dollar spent now on preventive measures against friction and ill-will would probably save us a thousand that may be needed later if Asia arms. Now is the supremely critical period when we may make friends or foes. At this time, when policy has not crystallized, women can perform a great international service. Every woman's club should discuss our duty to the Orient. Every matron who can invite as a guest to her home some Oriental student will be amply rewarded by acquaintance with a bright youth, who may wield great power a few years hence and to whom her courtesy will help interpret what America stands for.

America is still the "land of opportunity." It may have little power to help rebuild a devastated Europe, but its influence might largely redeem the rising millions beyond the setting sun from the necessity of following Europe's bloody path. The time to use that influence is Now.