Industrial Espionage in World War II

This morning I got to contemplating World War II and how the world changed at that point in history. The United States became perhaps the greatest economic power in the world at that point, largely be default. The war was massive, global in scale, and demanded a lot of resources. Being distant from the fields of battle, and being an advanced industrial nation, we were in a position to become the supplier of wartime goods to the rest of the beleaguered world.

I got to thinking on the strategies necessary to defeat the United States under those circumstances. Germany was its own source of production, drawing on the resources of conquered lands. However, the industries of Germany were in constant danger, as that nation was quite in the middle of the fighting. They may have established the fronts far from home, but air warfare eventually brought the battles home.

Japan was isolated,  being an island nation, and so able to remain distant from most of the fighting. England less so, being within striking distance of missiles and aircraft. Japan, however, had little ready access to resources and so had attenuated supply lines, making that nation vulnerable.

Our own isolation was more significant. Nobody was within easy striking distance, and as a nation we were huge. We had a lot of resources within our own nation. Industries were spread out and not easy targets. So, how to attack the United States? Large scale industrial espionage. Slow, stop or destroy the industrial infrastructure to halt the production and distribution of war materials.

The Germans had established groups of people in the United States who were sympathetic to the Nazi cause. Some of them did, indeed, act as agents of destruction and committed acts of espionage. Since I am only recently entered into this line of thought I do not yet know the degree of their success.

The other threat was the body of Japanese in America. More recently come to the United States than the Germans, and more easily identified, they were suspect as a people. Their culture in America was also a factor. Not having assimilated yet in large numbers they remained in clannish groups, huddled in identifiable Japanese neighborhoods. The prejudices of those already established worked against the Japanese in America in many ways.

Additionally, it was a practice of many Japanese families who could afford to do so to send their children back to Japan for part of their education. This at least implied an incomplete loyalty to the United States of America. How many of those children might have been indoctrinated and trained to perform organized espionage in the United States?

Now, if I can come to this conclusion so many years later, what might the intelligence community of the United States waging a war of undetermined outcome have concluded? That they rounded up the Japanese in America and isolated them might more easily be understood in this light. It certainly changed my perspective.

That does not make it any less terrible, taking people from their homes and confiscating their property. It was not, however, without precedent. Look at the Trail of Tears. In retrospect, some policies enacted by the United States have been far from ideal. Had the German people in America been less assimilated and more easily identified, a similar policy may have fallen on them, as well.

I was born slightly after the end of World War II. The United States had been less damaged by the trial, and perhaps made stronger for the discipline of wartime production. As the only industrial nation of significance still standing we had the advantage. I have enjoyed growing up in a rather prosperous era in a nation of great wealth and opportunity.

Many made sacrifices over the years to create that prosperity. Many were sacrificed, to include Negro slaves, displaced Native Americans, and displaced Japanese Americans. I am grateful to all who contributed to the freedom and prosperity I have experienced, whether they gave willingly or unwillingly.

I am not faced with the circumstances that led the decision makers in the United States to rob citizens and resident aliens of their freedom to protect the nation from industrial espionage. However, after contemplating the matter, I am perhaps a bit less inclined to judge them for their actions. Halting a likely enemy from committing an act of war is not a bad decision in times of war.

Victory in Iraq-

Bush, and now McCain/Palin have constantly beat the drum of "victory in Iraq." I have not yet seen the Bush criteria for victory. They seem to think that exporting a Western style democracy to that state will be the victory.

I am no expert in international affairs, but I do have experience with human interactions and criminal gangs. I have observed things I attribute to a tribal psychology to these groups. I may be wrong, but I did find some support in this web site. It relates to Somalia, another place America got involved in tribal issues and military engagement.

Generally, as long as a tribe exists there is a shared identity. Only the benefit of the tribe is important. The individual is not important, and other tribes and individuals are not important. To bring the tribe in line with some presumed higher purpose will require either constant violent shepherding or the destruction of the tribe.

If you have not yet read the article, please do so. It is not long, and expresses what I have intuitively held since we began our war in Iraq.

Iraq is not, by the nature of its population, a single national entity. It is an area on the face of the earth in which several tribes exist. We have accomplished what little has been accomplished entirely by force. Our strength is greater than their strength, especially since they will not readily unite even to drive us out.

They do, however, have patience. Their conflicts have gone on for many generations. They can wait until we eventually go away, and then return to the conflicts that have been their tradition. They know that we will eventually go away.

There is no victory in Iraq, unless we are willing to join one faction in genocide against the others. We will not do that, because it is contrary to the nature of our way of thinking.

It wasn't always. We nearly decimated the Native American populations. Again, by superiority in numbers and better technology. I have to wonder how the matter of westward expansion would have been handled by modern American politicians.

So, since we won't kill off the people living in the place called Iraq and claim the land as our own, we should just leave.

It will not be a defeat. For a defeat to exist there had to be the prospect of victory.

Since victory can easily be a matter of definition in a situation like this, we can draw a line somewhere that we have already crossed. That line will define our "victory." Let the Iraqi people evolve their own democracy when they are ready. Or not.

Then we can get the Hell out of there, and begin cleaning up the crap we have at home.

The American Perspective-

I really have no idea how to view the world other than from the grossly independent American perspective. I exist at the end of a line of genetic and social development that culminates in the strange land called America.

In reality, it is the United States of America. Perhaps it is somehow indicative of the American perspective that we have preempted the titles "America" and "American." Canadians are Americans. Mexicans are Americans. Uruguayans are Americans.

But none are Americans like Americans are Americans. I am an American, and really can see myself as nothing else.

One of my readings in recent years touched on what I think may be the root of the intense independence and individuality that is America. Our nation came into being, a transplant of the British Empire. A strong body of educated people formed this country with a structure that grew out of that empire, but embraced from its very beginning an ideal of independence.

Working with established forms of government and economics, that body built the beginnings of a nation. With a sound foundation, that young nation went forth to encompass a great area of land. We had several things others had not had before us. A mature foundation, and room to expand.

Consequently, the free thinkers always had a place to go. The spirit of independence and self-reliance had a frontier. For those with the necessary temperament, this was freedom with a capital F.

The more significant consequence of this freedom to "move on" was the creation of a robust middle class. Even laborers could simply choose to "move on" if the circumstances made life where they were living intolerable. In lands of developing industry where that freedom to "move on" was restricted, a vast pool of cheap labor (and resulting hoards of poor people) came into being.

Not in America. If things were not to your liking, you could "move on." Starving in a city is not much different than starving on a frontier. What was there to lose?

Consequently, many people had a degree of wealth, a strong sense of independence, and considerable freedom.

It has been like this for generations. Though we now have filled much of the land that made the freedom to "move on" possible, the spirit is still strong. We see the rest of the world from this perspective of individuality and freedom. It is an American Perspective.

Because the world grows ever smaller due to changes in the technologies of travel and communication, this perspective faces challenges. Challenges, and inevitable changes.

I really cannot speculate as to how this will work itself out over time. My thoughts go first one way, then the other. The ever increasing population of humans fill the available spaces and tax the available resources. This indicates a trend toward restrictions on individuality and freedom. Yet the existence of a new space, cyberspace, hints at liberation and expansive creativity.

What shall we do? What shall come of all of this?

I don't know. I do know, however, that even these words shall build what is to come. Words that spring from an American Perspective.