Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882 - Essay Example

1882 Chinese Exclusion Act Historically, the Chinese in America have experienced significant racial discrimination. The exact beginnings of this discrimination are founded on the various government policies which have been passed in order to manage the activities of Chinese in the United States. The 1882 Chinese Exclusion Act is one of the acts which controlled the activities of Chinese in the United States. It was passed into federal law by Chester Arthur on the 6th of May 1882 and was based on revisions in the 1880 Burlingame Treaty of 1868 (Kanazawa 779). These revisions ensured that the US could stop Chinese immigration and that this ban would last for 10 years. This law was later repealed in 1943. However despite such repeal, the act already implemented policies and set a precedent on the appropriate actions and attitudes which could be taken against the Chinese. This paper shall discuss the Chinese Exclusion Act has become the starting point and how it has resulted to decades of anti-Chinese sentiment. This paper is being carried out in order to establish a clear and comprehensive understanding of the implications and the impact of the Chinese Exclusion Act and how it has managed to continue to bear impact on the current attitudes and perceptions of Americans against the Chinese. Due to the California Gold Rush which lasted from 1848 to 1855, Chinese immigration to America started and this continued with the building of the first railroad systems (Kanazawa 780). In the early years of the Gold Rush where there was plenty of surface gold, tolerance for the Chinese was relatively high. In fact, because they were hard and persevering workers, they were easily accepted. However, as gold became harder to find and competition also increased, the tolerance for the Chinese and other foreigners was significantly decreased (Liu 152). At one point, many of them were even forcefully removed from the mines. These Chinese later settled in groups in various California cities, including San Francisco, taking in all sorts of odd jobs like laundry and working restaurants (Liu153). As a decline in the economy became apparent at the end of the Civil War, anti-Chinese sentiments became political issues raised by labor leader Denis Kearney and by then California Governor John Bigler (Murphy 458). These politicians attributed blame for lower wages to the Chinese ‘coolies.’ The Supreme Order of Caucasians which was a nationwide organization was also active in its anti-Chinese sentiments (Tian). As a result of the tension in the US involving the Chinese, the 1882 Chinese Exclusion Act was passed. This Act posed a restriction on free immigration into the US, and the specific target of this restriction was the Chinese. This act specifically mandated that skilled and unskilled Chinese laborers involved in mining were barred from entering the US for ten years; and if found guilty, they would be imprisoned and deported (Kanazawa 779). This act did not lead to the restriction of the Chinese immigrants into the US, however, it also led to various incidents of violence against them. Those who wanted to immigrate into the US had to ask for their government’s certification that they were indeed qualified to immigrate and this permit was also difficult to avail from their government (Kanazawa 780). This Exclusion Act provided the seed for other Chinese exclusionary laws in the US (Volpp). This act did not just impact on the Chinese people, but also on other Asians who were already in the US. For Chinese already in the US, they had to go back to China and obtain certifications. This act made the Chinese permanent aliens who could also not seek American citizenship (Volpp). After the act was passed, the Chinese men in the US did not have much chance of reuniting with the families or of even starting new families in the US. The amendments in 1884 provided further changes; these changes allowed those who were already immigrants to leave and then return. It also clarified that the act was applicable to the ethnic Chinese without considerations on their origin country (Volpp). And later, through the Scott Act of 1988, the Chinese Exclusion Act was amended and expanded, this time refusing reentry of these immigrants into the US. This Act was again renewed for another ten years by the Geary Act, and extended in 1902, this time requiring Chinese residents to register and apply for a certificate of residence or face deportation (Martens 3). Critics of the Chinese Exclusion Act declared that the act was equivalent to the legitimization of racial discrimination (Chin). The laws were based on racial considerations especially due to the fact that the immigration of races into the US was largely uncontrolled during this time period. And yet, many Americans strongly supported this act, including labor unions and other organizations as they believed that many companies were employing Chinese workers in order to save on labor expenses and to keep labor rates very low (Chin). For some companies, these labor practices were indeed being applied; and this did not help the cause of the Chinese people in any way. Moreover, the Chinese were forced to work for low labor rates because they did not have a bargaining position with the government considering that their status in the states was already questionable (Chin). And their employers took full advantage of the situation. This act effectively paralyzed the Chinese community already in the US. This act froze the population, prevented it from increasing in number or from being incorporated into US society (Chin and Karthikeyan). A small number of Chinese still trickled into the US as this act took effect. The processing of applying migrants into the US numbered about 56,000 and only about 30% and less were allowed entry into the US from 1910 to 1940 (Zhang 69). This act led to various negative activities in relation to the smuggling of Chinese into the US. Their entry into the US was mostly through commercial ships, whaling, and other fishing boats (Zhang 70). This human smuggling practice was soon applied to other races as well. The Immigration Act of 1924 further made the immigration process difficult for the Chinese, as all other Asian races were included in the restriction. As a result, the Chinese and the Asians were forced to live apart from the community in areas where they could survive on their own. For the Chinese, these areas are known as Chinatowns (Wong 111). The Chinese Exclusion Act also did not consider the various issues which the whites were being faced with and with America’s fixation on Chinese migrants, they were now being taken over by the Japanese (Brinkley and Kikuchi 23). These Japanese had the freedom to be migrants, to apply for legitimate work, some of them setting up businesses and many of them becoming truck drivers (Brinkley and Kikuchi 23). Soon, however, the National Origins Act of 1924 also targeted these Japanese, including all other Asians from East Asia. All of these acts and actions against the Chinese and against Asians have given rise to the seclusion and to the discriminatory practices against Asians (Brinkley and Kikuchi 5). For which reason, discrimination and anti-Chinese sentiment has been rampant in US society despite the civil rights guarantees indicated in the constitution. Immediately after the act was passed, protests from the Chinese community in America were heard. These protests however did not have much influence or impact on the American including the Chinese government (Choi). As a result of this act, anti-Chinese sentiment in the US became legalized. This act caused severe and significant damage on the Chinese, their lives, and their activities. There were various habeas corpus cases filed by Chinese seeking reprieve from the courts. In the case of Chew Heong v. United States, the court declared that the Chinese workers in America could gain entry into the US, but could not bring their spouse into the US, unless their spouse has lived in the US before 1880 (Hing 24). In another case, Judge Sawyer of the circuit court of California permitted the entry of a Chinese worker who was able to gain a certificate from the Chinese government; the entry of his wife was however denied as she did not have a certificate (Hing 24). This law made anti-Chinese violence, expulsion, and hysteria even worse and it reached its peak in November of 1995 when an anti-Chinese riot sought to forcibly expel every Chinese in Seattle; the riot settled when the state sent in troops to manage the crowd (Liu 153). In Washington, Chinese were also placed into boxcars and transported to Portland; another anti-Chinese riot was also carried out in Wyoming where Chinese laborers were attacked. About 30 Chinese were killed, and 15 were wounded. Properties were also destroyed by the mob. Complaints on these violent acts were filed by the Chinese Minister Zheng to the US, however, there was no favorable response from the latter (Tsai 70). Anti-Chinese sentiment is largely based on racial superiority. The whites or the Caucasians have been attributed with feelings of racial superiority. As a result, the subjugation and exclusion of other races, including the Chinese race has been perpetuated (Murphy 458). Pro-Chinese activists in the US took on the paternalistic attitude in order to protect the Chinese from the actions of the society. They believed that it was their responsibility to protect the Chinese because of the considerable amount of violence carried out against them (Murphy 459). Little effort by the government was made in order to protect the Chinese. Although the whites condemned racist acts as violent and barbaric acts, they did not actually do anything to prevent such acts. Based on an assessment of the events leading up to the signing of the act, The 1882 Chinese Exclusion Act seems to have been a product of many years of racial tension and resentments between the Chinese and the Americans. This act has long been considered a significantly unjust law against the Chinese. In fact, this act is considered one of the most irrational and ineffective acts to ever be passed by the national government (Tian). The racist feeling which was seen during the 18th century when the act was passed was manifested at a time when America was also being depicted as a county which was willing to point blame to others in times of their great need. From 1849 until the passage of the act, the Chinese and the Americans were able to work well with each other; they even respected each other. However, during the reconstruction period after the Civil War, the American economy suffered a huge blow with its major losses and the widespread destruction. Economic damage, especially for the south tore apart cities and laid them in ruins (Tian). With these hardships, the US looked for possible solutions to its economic woes and they single-handedly established that the Chinese were to blame and therefore had to go. The Chinese Exclusion Act negatively impacted on the whole American society, including the Chinese, and other foreigners. Due to the reduced manpower resource for American industries, their economic strength became compromised and wage labor, not slavery or indentured service, became the major form of employment. The labor force increased with large scale immigration, mostly by the Chinese. And the laborers who were pushed out of work during the period of industrial depression could not manage on their own (Chan 3). Since the Chinese were ever willing to work with cheap wages, the manual labor jobs were given to them, instead of their white counterparts. The animosity among the Caucasians soon emerged and caused riots and politicians also expressed their opinions on the matter. The acts and laws would soon be passed and these laws also imposed other restrictions, including intermarriage with Asians and whites and those seeking reentry in America were hard up in gaining certificates of residence (Tian). The impacts of the act were very much visible, especially with the application of various laws following the passage of the Chinese Exclusion Act. These acts caused various restrictions on communities, and these communities found it difficult to expand their number and their areas especially with the growing discriminatory acts against them. For other foreigners in America however, they were able to merge well with American society and they were even to perform well economically and socially within American society (Norton 35). Twenty years following the passage of the Act, other countries also implemented their own anti-Chinese acts. Canada actually passed their Chinese Immigration Act in 1923. In this case, the 1882 Chinese Exclusion Act impacted negatively not only to Chinese in the states, but also to Chinese in Canada (Tian). Before their act was passed, Canada only levied taxes on migrating Chinese, however, with the passage of their own Immigration Act, their restriction on entry of Chinese became absolute. In evaluating the irrationality of these acts, it is important to note that there are millions of Chinese now scattered across various countries around the globe, and only a few of these countries have actually placed a ban on their immigration (Tian). The US as a melting pot of races can consider its functions more completely as a means of learning from its history. It can also learn what courses of action to take in order to secure the well-being of all its citizens. The Exclusion Act has caused much anxiety, for the Chinese, as well as for the whites because all in all, the American society has been harmed by its implementation. The Chinese Exclusion Act was a bold, and yet weak act. It was based on bitterness and irrational feelings which were not founded on America’s policies on caring for the weak and for the poor. The impact of the exclusion laws was not limited to the borders of the US. It also reached other areas, including Canada and other Western countries (Tian). Chinese migrants have claimed various areas in different regions; in the process, they have helped in maintaining the socioeconomic and political bonds with their native practices, their families, and with China. In effect, Chinese immigrants have long been living lives across different borders. They rarely saw each other because of fear of being prevented entry into the US. The exclusion laws also increased the regulations on Asian migration into the US and this damaged the relations between different countries (Lee 8). All in all, the need to have someone to blame caused America’s economic issues. As already mentioned, the Civil War reconstruction, called for significant resources which the Chinese were willing to provide through hard labor and low wages; the Americans were not willing to provide these resources. As a result, they suffocated their own economy. Based on these incidents, it seems imperative for Americans not to be too quick in pointing the blame on other people, instead to focus on solutions which can benefit them all. The act in so many ways is seen as an irrational act, especially for those who experienced the economic hardship during this time. Some individuals also considered it morally questionable. However, some people also seemed to favor it. Kearney, a political leader and California John Bigler also blamed the Chinese for their economic issues. His slogan was: “The Chinese must go” (Tian). Sinophobia was also all over the news and across various government agencies. These groups include the Supreme Order of Caucasians which supported Bigler’s and Kearney’s opinions. Kearney believed that the Chinese were alien migrants wanting work and trying other jobs. Even as his views are crucial, it is also flawed because American born citizens were not willing to work for hard and long hours on the railroad and other essential activities. Therefore, in hiring the Chinese, the railroads were built and this led to faster communication and increased productivity (Newman 45). Bigler’s concern on the Chinese never being assimilated into American society is valid. Chinese culture is a collectivist culture, it is against individualistic focus of the US, however as collectivism sets in, high adaptability is needed (Tian). Bigler’s imposition of the tax was not necessary. The Chinese would not likely have any difficulty in adjusting were it not for the legal restrictions made by the government on these Chinese. Even with these restrictions, the Chinese still have made major contributions to California and the rest of America. Arguments have also emerged on the fact that even as the Chinese were the ones who were targeted by Americans, other nationalities had free reign over their country. This could mean that the Chinese Exclusion Act is significantly based on racism; however, there are thousands of immigrants willing to consider low wages (Tian). This set-up seems to contradict America’s economic attitudes on being a free and tolerant, as well as an accepting nation. Conclusion The 1882 Chinese Exclusion Act is an act which sought to prevent Chinese from gaining any form of legitimate status in the United States. It was an act borne out of blatant discrimination, economic and labor competition, as well as perceived white superiority. This act effectively trapped and stunted Chinese development and population growth in America for many years. In the end, it also gave rise to anti-Chinese sentiments which are very much apparent to date. This act represents a harsh and realistic outlook into America’s history of discrimination. This discrimination and racial tension is still seen today and even as various moves and political acts have been carried out in order to ease the tension and to eliminate discrimination, the actual reality of American living for the Chinese is very much different. It is still rife in labor discrimination and societal cliches. The act has had a significant impact on the Chinese people and also on Americans. This law was implemented at a time when discrimination and racism was rampant in America. During economic difficulties, America seems to have a tendency to target the minorities, to blame them for their hardships. However, the Chinese were hardly at fault for America’s economic woes then. It was the Civil War which caused America its own hardship, and the war itself cannot be attributed to the Chinese. Their only ‘fault,’ was in being hardy and persevering workers, qualities which the Americans were not willing to apply to their own lives. Works Cited Brinkley, Frank, and Dairoku Kikuchi. “A history of the Japanese people from the earliest times to the end of the Meiji era.” New York: The Encyclopedia Britannica Co., 1915, Print. Chin, Gabriel J., and Hrishi Karthikeyan. “Preserving Racial Identity: Population Patterns and the Application of Anti-Miscegenation Statutes to Asian Americans, 1910-1950.” Asian Law Journal (2002), 9. Print. Choi, Jung Hee. “The Rhetoric of Inclusion: The I.W.W. and Asian Workers.” San Francisco State University (1999). Web. 15 May 2012 from http://userwww.sfsu.edu/~epf/journal_archive/volume_VIII,_1999/choi_j.pdf Hing, Bill Ong. “Making and Remaking Asian America through Immigration Policy, 1850- 1990.” Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 1993. Print. Kanazawa, Mark. “Immigration, Exclusion, and Taxation: Anti-Chinese Legislation Gold Rush in California.” The Journal of Economic History, (2005) 65.3, pp. 779-805. Print. Lee, Erika. At America’s Gates. North Carolina: The University of North Carolina Press, 2003. Print. Newman, John J. United States History. New York: AMSCO, 2002. Print. Liu, H. “Chinese Exclusion Laws and the U.S.-China Relationship.” State Polytechnic University (2003). Web. 15 May 2012 from http://www.csupomona.edu/~jis/2003/Liu.pdf Martens, Daniel J. “The Debate on the Chinese Exclusionary Act and Its Repeal.” (1998). Web. 15 May 2012 from http://www.wcusd15.org/martens/apushistory/chapter19/Chinese%20Immigration%20Act.pdf Murphy, Erin L. “Prelude to Imperialism1: Whiteness and Chinese Exclusion in the Reimagining of the United States.” Journal of Historical Sociology, (2005), 18. 4. Print. Norton, Henry K. The Story of California from the Earliest Days to the Present. Chicago: A.C. McClurg & Co, 1924. Print. Tian, Kelly. “The Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882 and Its Impact on North American Society.” Undergraduate Research Journal for the Human Sciences, (2010), 9. Print. Tsai, Shih-Shan Henry. Chinese American Experience in America. Indianapolis: Indiana University Press, 1986. Print. Volpp, Leti. “Divesting Citizenship: On Asian American History and the Loss of Citizenship through Marriage.” University of California Law Review, (2005), 52. Print. Wong, Morrison G. “Chinese Americans.” Corwin Group. 2005. Web. 15 May 2012 from http://www.corwin.com/upm-data/6035_Chapter_6_Min_I_Proof_2.pdf Zhang, Sheldon. Smuggling and trafficking in human beings: all roads lead to America. Greenwood Publishing Group. 2007. Print.   Read More