AAS33B Write an essay based on the given documents
Need help with my History question – I’m studying for my class.
Please follow the instructions carefully ! ! !
Attach below are the example of two 0 point essay, please do not make the same mistake and use only the documents provided or the sources I cited in these two 0 point essay.
Comments by the professor for 1st essay : This submission does not show a comprehension of the content or the instructions for the assignment.
Comments for the 2nd revised essay :
Unfortunately, your revision does not show a correct understanding of the immigration exclusion and economic discrimination and your analysis of political disfranchisement and mass incarceration is at times incorrect and missing context and relevant information.
For example, why are you using Takao Ozawa case as an example of immigration exclusion? While Ozawa was an immigrant, he was not excluded from coming to this country. He immigrated to America before the 1907 when the Gentlemen’s Agreement Act was passed and he lived in America for 20 years. Ozawa is not an example to discuss immigration exclusion because that category has to do more with policies such as the Chinese Exclusion Act or the Asiatic Barred Zone Act which “excluded” Asian immigrants from coming to America. Thus, Ozawa is not a good example to use.
Second, how is the May 9th Act related to economic discrimination? You write:
the law predominantly applied to South Americans from low socioeconomic households, this was a tactic to exclude individuals with minimal economic value to the states. Thus, the state propagated economic discrimination against non-whites.
So where is your example or evidence to support that last claim? I am not sure how a law to allow Filipinos to naturalize through the military is related to economic discrimination.
Third, how the doc #7 —a cartoon in the 1880 related to the internment camp? I am not sure if I see a connection and you didn’t provide much of an explanation as to how the two relate.
Your revision does not show much a revision because other than some rearranging of information that was previous written and an adding of the four categories as headers, there’s not much of an adjustment. Thus, your score will remain the same for it does not show an understand of the content or an effort to follow up and double check if you’re information is correct.
Instructions:
To complete midterm #2, you will write a standard long format essay (at least 1000 words, 5-6, pages, 12 point Times New Roman font, double space) to answer the following prompt:
- Analyze and assess the four types of institutionalized discrimination (immigration exclusion, economic discrimination, political disfranchisement, mass incarcerations) that applied to Asians and Asian Americans during the era of exclusion (1882-1943) and the efforts of Asian Americans to resist and defend their constitutional rights.
Your essay will need to take into consideration the following documents:
|
Document #1: “The true bond which connects the child with the body politic is not the matter of an inanimate piece of land, but the moral relations of his parentage. . . . The place of birth produces no change in the rule that children follow the condition of their fathers, for it is not naturally the place of birth that gives rights, but extraction … To what nation a person belongs is by the laws of all nations closely dependent on descent; it is almost an universal rule that the citizenship of the parents determines it — that of the father where children are lawful, and, where they are bastards, that of their mother, without regard to the place of their birth, and that must necessarily be recognized as the correct canon, since nationality is, in its essence, dependent on descent.” Document #1: Dissenting opinions of Justice C.J. Fuller of the Supreme Court in the case of Wong Kim Ark v. The United States (1898) |
|
Document #2: “My honesty and industriousness are well known among my Japanese and American friends. In name Benedict Arnold was an American, but at heart he was a traitor. In name I am not an American, but at heart I am a true American” Document #2: Takao Ozawa’s brief in the Ozawa v. United States Supreme Court Case (1922) |
|
Document #3: “Any native-born Filipino [or any alien, or any Porto Rican not a citizen of the United States] of the age of twenty-one years and upward who has declared his intention to become a citizen of the United States and who has enlisted or may hereafter enlist in the U.S. Navy or Marines Corps or the Naval Auxiliary Service, and who, after service of not less than three years…are eligible of citizenship.” Document #3: The Act of May 9th, 1918 |
|
Document #4 “Korematsu was born on our soil, of parents born in Japan. The Constitution makes him a citizen of the United States by nativity, and a citizen of California by residence. No claim is made that he is not loyal to this country. There is no suggestion that, apart from the matter involved here, he is not law-abiding and well disposed. Korematsu, however, has been convicted of an act not commonly a crime. It consists merely of being present in the state whereof he is a citizen, near the place where he was born, and where all his life he has lived Even more unusual is the series of military orders which made this conduct a crime…A citizen’s presence in the locality, however, was made a crime only if his parents were of Japanese birth. Had Korematsu been one of four — the others being, say, a German alien enemy, an Italian alien enemy, and a citizen of American-born ancestors, convicted of treason but out on parole — only Korematsu’s presence would have violated the order. The difference between their innocence and his crime would result, not from anything he did, said, or thought, different than they, but only in that he was born of different racial stock.” Document #4: Justice Robert Jackson, Dissent in Korematsu v. United States (1944) |
|
Document #5 “It may be true that the blond Scandinavian and the brown Hindu have a common ancestor in the dim reaches of antiquity, but the average man knows perfectly well that there are unmistakeable and profound differences between them today, and it is not impossible, if that common ancestor could be materialized in the flesh, we should discover that he was himself sufficiently differentiated from both of his descendants to preclude his racial classification with either…. The words of familiar speech, which were used by the original framers of the law, were intended to include only the type of man whom they knew as white. The immigration of that day was almost exclusively from [Europe], whence they and their forebears had come… It was the descendants of these, and other immigrants of like origin, who constitute the white population of the country when the naturalization law of 1790 was adopted, and, there is no reason to doubt, with like intent and meaning. When we now hold is that the words “free white persons” are words of common speech, to be interpreted in accordance with the understanding of the common man, synonymous with the word “Caucasian” only as that word is popularly understood. As so understood and used, whatever may be the speculations of ethnologist, it does not include the body of people to whom the appellee belongs.” Document #5: U.S. Supreme Court Decision in the U.S. v Bhagat Singh Thind (1923) |
|
Document #6 Document #6: A picture of the Lee family and their “paper son” (1920) |
|
Document #7 Document #7: “And Still They Come!” by The WASP, December 4, 1880 |
|
Document #8: Document #8: Salvador Roldan and his fiance Majorie Rodgers. |
Your grade (200 points) for this assignment will be based on the following criteria:
- Thesis: Present a thesis that makes a historically defensible claim and response to all part of the question. Your thesis must consist of one or more sentences located in the introduction.
- Argument Development: Develop and support a cohesive argument that recognizes and accounts for the historical complexity by explicitly illustrating relationships among historical evidence such as contradictions, corroboration, and/or qualification.
- Use of Documents: Utilize the content of at least six documents to support the stated thesis or a relevant argument. For every document below the minimum of six quota, 30 points will be deducted from your total score.
- Sourcing the documents: Explaining the significance of the author’s point of view, author’s purpose, historical context, and/or audience for at least six documents.
- Contextualization: Situate the argument by explaining the broader historical events, developments, or processes immediately relevant to the question.
- Outside Evidences: Provide examples or additional evidence (key terms/concept from the reading and class lectures) beyond those found in the documents to support your argument.
[Double Check Your Submission] double-check your submission to make sure it meets all of the criteria for the assignment.
- [Proofread] Please proofread your essay utilizes at least six documents to answer the essay prompt in a clear, organized, detailed, and cohesive essay format (short essay response includes a short introduction including a thesis statement, body paragraphs with supporting evidence, and conclusion statement)
- [At least 1000 words] Your submission must be at least 1000 words and include specific details, key terms, and contents from class readings and lectures. Any submission with fewer than 1000 words will automatically receive a zero
- [Include citations of at least six documents] When quoting or citing from the document, a simple in writing MLA citation (source #) at the end of the sentence is sufficient. Any essay that does not include a citation of assigned documents and discuss relevant information/content beyond the documents and written in a vague and broad manner will not receive partial credit
