Sam Lebovic, professor of history at George Mason University, joins Danny and Derek for a look at the Espionage Act of 1917 and its use over the years.
Also a follow-up on the subject of suspicion of Japanese-American espionage as a pretext for internment: it is quite obvious from the pattern of where people of Japanese descent were interned (for example, many in California but very few in Hawaii where such individuals were a much larger demographic of the total population) that the underlying motive was valuable farm land seizure from non-white owners and redistribution to white Americans, and the claimed threat was mainly a fog of war alibi (with obvious and uncomfortable parallels to Nazi policy). The reparations scheme that the U.S. implemented in the decade after WW2, mostly to settle unresolved diplomatic grievances with Japan itself, only compensated the dispossessed Japanese Americans for a minuscule percentage of the value of the seized land and assets.
I have a question for Sam if he ever reads this: is there any research into the use of proxy lawfare as a way to restrict press or publication freedom to transmit intelligence coded as fictional or rhetorical written forms? I am thinking in particular of the many unusually high-profile obscenity, libel, and copyright cases in the 1920s and 1930s. There are some quite indicative articles in the Columbia Law Review from this period that deal with the controversy over cases involving people like Henry Ford as well as fascist propaganda. I wonder if this would explain the relative lack of “espionage proper” cases in the same period.
Excellent interview! The tension between secrecy and free speech most illuminating.
Great listen.
What a fantastic episode, Sam’s level of detail really brought to life the era of the Palmer Raids.
Also a follow-up on the subject of suspicion of Japanese-American espionage as a pretext for internment: it is quite obvious from the pattern of where people of Japanese descent were interned (for example, many in California but very few in Hawaii where such individuals were a much larger demographic of the total population) that the underlying motive was valuable farm land seizure from non-white owners and redistribution to white Americans, and the claimed threat was mainly a fog of war alibi (with obvious and uncomfortable parallels to Nazi policy). The reparations scheme that the U.S. implemented in the decade after WW2, mostly to settle unresolved diplomatic grievances with Japan itself, only compensated the dispossessed Japanese Americans for a minuscule percentage of the value of the seized land and assets.
I have a question for Sam if he ever reads this: is there any research into the use of proxy lawfare as a way to restrict press or publication freedom to transmit intelligence coded as fictional or rhetorical written forms? I am thinking in particular of the many unusually high-profile obscenity, libel, and copyright cases in the 1920s and 1930s. There are some quite indicative articles in the Columbia Law Review from this period that deal with the controversy over cases involving people like Henry Ford as well as fascist propaganda. I wonder if this would explain the relative lack of “espionage proper” cases in the same period.