pudge's Journal: Internment Camps

Today's local news (KING 5) had a story about an "internment camp survivor." OK, I think the U.S. internment camps were a terrible thing ... but "survivor"? That's like saying someone is a Yosemite Park survivor: yes, some people tragically died, but it was rare and they were unfortunate accidents.

Maybe they just couldn't come up with another word. Maybe victim? Too wimpy ... maybe former prisoner? Too blunt ... maybe simply, internee? Whatever you choose, "survivor" implies death was expected, common, or normal, and that's simply not the case at all.

Of course, this is the same news program that earlier in the week had a graphic on the screen about the release of the "Intellegence (sic) Report."

Pudge goes on vacation!

[John Harrison]

Next time you're headed to Yosemite stop in at Topaz instead. For several years. Is Auschwitz similar to Disneyland? People die at Disneyland occasionally, right?

Re:

[pudge]

In regard to the prisoners dying, U.S. internment camps were a lot more like Disneyland than Auschwitz. That's true, and it's the point. To call people "survivors" is nonsense. It degrades the truth. Enough terrible things happened with our treatment of Japanese Americans without having to imply they were being killed off.

Re:

[John Harrison]

and making some sort of comparison with Yosemite is equally degrading to the truth and to the people that were forcibly placed in these camps. I agree that "victim" is probably a more accurate term.

Re:

[pudge]

and making some sort of comparison with Yosemite is equally degrading to the truth and to the people that were forcibly placed in these camps.

Well, no, it's not, since it was quite obvious I was only drawing the comparison to show how calling someone a "survivor" is utterly absurd, not to say that the two are actually similar.