1answer.
Ask question
Login Signup
Ask question
All categories
  • English
  • Mathematics
  • Social Studies
  • Business
  • History
  • Health
  • Geography
  • Biology
  • Physics
  • Chemistry
  • Computers and Technology
  • Arts
  • World Languages
  • Spanish
  • French
  • German
  • Advanced Placement (AP)
  • SAT
  • Medicine
  • Law
  • Engineering
qwelly [4]
3 years ago
6

During the world war two the united states government interned Japanese Americans in camps, citing security concerns. This was a

curtailment of American citizens' individual rights. Do you think such actions are ever justified by a democratic government? Why or why not?
History
1 answer:
CaHeK987 [17]3 years ago
3 0
I do not think actions like this can be justified. The internment of Japanese-American citizens was one of the biggest mistakes made by the federal government in the 20th century.

Executive Order 9066 called for the internment of Japanese-American citizens shortly after the attack on Pearl Harbor by the Japanese empire. Even though this attack came from Japan, it is wrong to assume that all Japanese-American citizens supported the action. Roughly 2/3rd of the people who were put in internment camps were born in the United States and were citizens. Violating the rights of citizens who have done nothing wrong is never good to do.

A democratic government is supposed to protect individual liberties and rights, not violate them on purpose.
You might be interested in
They serve four year terms of office.
adelina 88 [10]
The answer is: Presidents
4 0
3 years ago
Read 2 more answers
As the turn of the century why did most immigrants to the United States settle in cities
aleksandrvk [35]

Answer:

Because there were so many people

Explanation:

The reason is because there were so many people there and so they needed big cities. Even the may flower was big enough to carry everyone so they took separate boats

8 0
4 years ago
If YOU were a delegate at the Constitutional Convention, would you have been a Federalist or an Anti-federalist? Explain your re
Pachacha [2.7K]

Answer:

Anti-Federalist.

Explanation:

The Anti-Federalist movement is what makes up the core of the current Republican Party. It called for a weaker central government (or what is now known as the federal government), and allowed for individual states to govern themselves based on their own needs and, to a certain degree, wants. Essentially, what is imposed on one group can be drastically different from another community.

For example, take counties for example. A urban county in California can create legal codes and laws that are more suited for it's own citizens, such as having a larger police force, focus on worker's rights, and many others. On the other hand, a county with large amounts of farmland may prioritize getting a sustainable and easy access to water for each member of the community that owns farmlands, as well as priority towards community goods that can enhance not only their individual produce, but also the community's output and growth as well, not only on the scale of supply, but also in profits, etc.

Essentially, the Anti-Federalist party wished for internal sustainability on the long term, by allowing smaller individual governments to meet the needs of it's own people. What does the federal government do then, you may ask? In that case, the federal government keeps together the union, and is tasked with foreign affairs. Each individual county may contribute funds to the state, which in turn contribute funds to the federal government (mandatorily). The federal government would then take care of the foreign affairs, alliances, as well as use the funds to raise an army in times of need. The system of the federal government should still be in place, with the executive, legislative, and judicial branch. The power will be balanced as it is intended to be today.

~

3 0
3 years ago
Read 2 more answers
HELP!! WILL MARK YOU BRAINLIEST!! VERY URGENT!!
swat32

Answer:

Italy: Trentino, part of Slovene-speaking Gorizia, Trieste, the German-speaking South Tirol, and partly Croatian-speaking Istria. France: lsace-Lorraine as well as various African colonies from the German Empire, and Middle East territories from the Ottoman Empire. Great Britian: Britain gained territory from Germany in Africa making British rule continuous from Cape Town to the Suez Canal

Explanation:

I'm assuming you meant from WWI because that would make the most sense

4 0
3 years ago
How did judaism differ from earlier religions in south west asia?
IceJOKER [234]
(B). Everyone else was pagan.
8 0
3 years ago
Read 2 more answers
Other questions:
  • Why was neutrality a difficult policy for the United States to maintain?
    7·2 answers
  • What was the favorite target for viking raiders?
    14·1 answer
  • What are the similarities between the first and second great awakening?
    7·1 answer
  • The "New South" was created after Reconstruction, and was influenced by a variety of individuals, groups, and events. Which stat
    9·2 answers
  • What most fundamentally aided the spread of Enlightenment ideas from Europe to America?
    12·2 answers
  • Trace the development of Japan during the late-19th and early- 20th centuries. How did these developments contribute to Japan's
    6·1 answer
  • What is a cabinet and how people consist of it
    8·1 answer
  • Describe how globalization has changed Dubai. Use visual clues from the image above as well as your own knowledge to support you
    8·1 answer
  • Why would absolute monarchs claim divine right?
    13·2 answers
  • Who was the first african on record to become christian
    12·1 answer
Add answer
Login
Not registered? Fast signup
Signup
Login Signup
Ask question!