To be clear, we weren't "Japanese" victims. 2/3 of us were American citizens, and the remainder of the imprisoned first-generation immigrants -- many of whom had lived in the US for decades prior to the war -- were barred from naturalization because of their race. This would remain the case until the passage of the Immigration Act of 1952[1].

And while I don't wish to be overly prickly about it since you are obviously approaching this from a place of good intentions, you might want to read up on what we call the "model minority myth"[2]. The "success" of the Japanese American community in surmounting the challenges of the exclusion and incarceration experience has been used repeatedly as a cudgel in US cultural and political discourse wielded against other groups for their perceived failures in achieving the "American Dream." From what you have written here, I know that is not what you support.

1. https://encyclopedia.densho.org/Immigration_Act_of_1952/ 2. https://densho.org/learn/model-minority-myth/

> 2/3 of us were American citizens

Also, I should remember this from George Carlin.

The "you have no rights" sketch [0] should be mandatory watching for every American.

[0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xnBLZkcgyyQ

> you might want to read up on what we call the "model minority myth"[2].

That's a very interesting perspective. I can see how that could happen and how it feels for those demeaned by the comparison. Thanks for the link (and actually just for being engaging in what feels like HN becoming an increasingly hostile frenzy of flagging and downvoting everything).

Absolutely! I feel like I better understand your original comment as well, and I don't think you deserved to be piled on so aggressively. So many of our potentially thoughtful conversations are turning into circular firing squads these days.

Words do matter, but intentions matter more.

It's surprising to see you flagged and downvoted. I would have thought, "concentration camps are bad" plus "our prisons do incredible harm to people" would be uncontroversial takes.

What worries me more yareal is that the real thrust of my comments are celebrating human resilience and capacity to survive and prosper.

I can understand that some readers just see the words "concentration camp" and have a knee-jerk "eeeew!" reaction and downvote. They are frightened of certain topics without further thought. That's kinda forgivable.

But it's sinister that compassionate comments elicit a frenzy of flagging and downvoting. That seems worse than any simple "far right" sentiment. I'm starting to suspect there's a small but strong anti-humanist element around HN.

Edit: I'm quite sure there are vehement anti-humanists around here. The self-loathing is cloying.

I think some of your initial posts might have read as tone deaf. A sentiment similar to "look at the beauty in this tragedy" can feel like downplaying the tragedy, or it can feel like downplaying similar, other tragedies. ("This concentration camp made their space beautiful" can carry the implication that others don't, unintentionally suggesting that somehow the people in this one are better than the people in that one.)

You later clarified, but I suspect there's also a group of folks who don't want to hear that the US had concentration camps.

You're right. And I was really pleased that geephroh introduced me to the "model minority myth". It's an area of psychology I've not encountered before. Cheers

> uncontroversial takes

That's not sufficient for a good HN post, especially when the effect is to perpetuate a flamewar. The HN guidelines contain a point about this:

"Don't feed egregious comments by replying; flag them instead."

(which is our euphemism for please don't feed the trolls)

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html