[To Investigate] How American Citizenship was Performed by Japanese Americans Interned at Tule Lake Incarceration Camp Following the Loyalty Questionnaire

Final Year Dissertation for Theatre: Writing, Directing, Performance at the University of York.

You can read the full essay here.

Condensed Argument

That the “Acts” of American Citizenship and, therefore, American Citizenship itself (as defined by the “Acts”) was undermined by the treatment of Japanese Americans’ citizenships. This is illustrated by the Case Study of the Loyalty Questionnaire, which, by dividing inmates into ‘loyal’ and ‘disloyal’, regardless of citizenship, and subsequently leading to a renunciation of inmates’ citizenships, undermined American Citizenship by exposing its artificial and performative construction. 

What was the Incarceration of Japanese Americans During World War Two?

During World War II, the U.S. government forcibly relocated and incarcerated around 120,000 Japanese Americans, two-thirds of whom were U.S. citizens, in internment camps across the western United States. Following the attack on Pearl Harbour in 1941, anti-Japanese sentiment surged, leading to widespread fear and prejudice against Japanese Americans, fuelled by baseless suspicions of disloyalty and espionage.

In 1942, President Franklin D. Roosevelt signed Executive Order 9066, authorising the removal of Japanese Americans from the West Coast "military zones." Families were given only days to gather their belongings before being sent to temporary assembly centres and eventually to internment camps in remote locations. These camps, often overcrowded and under-resourced, imposed harsh living conditions and stripped detainees of their civil rights, property, and livelihoods.

The incarceration of Japanese Americans is now recognised as a grave injustice rooted in racial prejudice rather than legitimate national security concerns. In 1988, the U.S. government formally apologised and granted reparations to surviving internees through the Civil Liberties Act, acknowledging the profound suffering and long-term impacts of the internment on Japanese American communities. The legacy of this dark chapter continues to remind Americans of the importance of protecting civil liberties, especially during times of national crisis.

What was Tule Lake Incarceration Camp?

Tule Lake Incarceration Camp, located in northern California, was the largest and most notorious of the ten camps where Japanese Americans were forcibly interned during World War II. Originally established in 1942 as part of the U.S. government's mass removal and detention of Japanese Americans under Executive Order 9066, Tule Lake initially housed individuals removed from the West Coast. However, it soon became the designated "segregation centre" for those considered “disloyal” by the authorities.

In 1943, the U.S. government issued a loyalty questionnaire to all adult Japanese American detainees in the camps. Two questions in particular, which asked detainees to swear unqualified allegiance to the United States and to forswear allegiance to the Japanese emperor, sparked confusion, resentment, and fear. Those who answered “no” to these questions, or who protested the questionnaire's implications, were labeled "disloyal" and often transferred to Tule Lake. Many who resisted were simply frustrated by their unjust treatment and the offensive assumptions behind the questions, yet their responses were used to justify even more restrictive measures against them.

Tule Lake eventually became a highly militarised site with increased surveillance, barbed wire, and armed guards, and the camp experienced multiple strikes, protests, and uprisings in response to poor living conditions and the brutal treatment of detainees. At its peak, Tule Lake held nearly 18,000 people, including both Japanese Americans and Japanese immigrants, under particularly harsh conditions.

After the war, the stigma associated with Tule Lake followed many of its former detainees, who were sometimes shunned or viewed with suspicion even within Japanese American communities. Today, Tule Lake is recognised as a symbol of resistance and resilience, and it remains an important site of memory and education regarding the injustices of Japanese American incarceration.

What was the Loyalty Questionnaire? And What were its Repercussions?

1. Increased Tensions and Divisions: The questionnaire split the Japanese American community. Those who answered “no” or protested were labeled “No-No Boys” and were often regarded as disloyal. Some who answered “yes” felt pressured or anxious about being labeled traitors by both the government and their communities if they refused.

2. Transfer to Tule Lake: Those who refused or answered negatively were often transferred to the Tule Lake Segregation Center, a high-security camp designated for “disloyal” detainees. Tule Lake became a site of unrest, protest, and harsh conditions as detainees resisted the label of “disloyalty” and protested their treatment.

3. Military Draft Resistance: Many Japanese American men answered “yes” to the loyalty questions but still felt strongly against being drafted under such discriminatory conditions. This led to significant draft resistance, particularly at the Heart Mountain camp in Wyoming, where more than 60 men were prosecuted and jailed for refusing the draft.

4. Legacy of Stigma: Even after the war, former detainees who had answered “no” were sometimes stigmatized by others in the Japanese American community, leading to painful divisions that lingered for decades. The label of “disloyalty” had lasting repercussions, affecting relationships, job opportunities, and social standing.

5. Political and Legal Fallout: The Loyalty Questionnaire was later viewed as one of the U.S. government’s many injustices against Japanese Americans during WWII. In 1988, with the passage of the Civil Liberties Act, the U.S. government issued a formal apology and provided reparations to surviving Japanese American detainees, acknowledging the harm caused by the questionnaire and the entire internment program.

What is the Performativity of Citizenship?

The performativity of citizenship refers to the concept that citizenship is not merely a legal status or identity but something actively expressed and enacted through behaviours, language, and social practices. In this view, citizenship is seen as performative, meaning it is brought into being through actions and interactions, much like a role in a play that is given meaning through performance.

This approach, rooted in theories of performativity (notably from philosophers like Judith Butler), suggests that people "perform" their citizenship by engaging in activities associated with civic identity, such as voting, protesting, community involvement, or even daily acts of mutual respect and social responsibility. These performances help individuals embody and claim their roles as citizens, often in ways that challenge or expand traditional definitions of citizenship.

For example, marginalised groups may assert their rights and identities through public demonstrations or community work, enacting their citizenship in ways that defy exclusionary norms. In this sense, citizenship is not static or merely granted by a state; it is dynamic and continually shaped through public engagement and participation, allowing people to redefine and expand what it means to belong and to have a voice in society.

You can read the full essay here.