From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

To-do list for Chinese Exclusion Act (United States):	edit · history · watch · refresh
Here are some tasks you can do:

	This article is part of WikiProject China, a project to improve all China-related articles. If you would like to help improve this and other China-related articles, please join the project. All interested editors are welcome.
Start	This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale. (add comments)
More information about this article... High This article has been rated as high-importance on the importance scale.

	This page is within the scope of WikiProject Asian Americans, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to articles on Asian Americans on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
Start	This article has been rated as start-Class on the Project's quality scale. (If you rated the article please give a short summary at comments to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses.)

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject History, a group devoted to the the study, and improvement of Wikipedia articles on the subject, of History. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.
Start	This article has been rated as start-Class on the quality scale.
High	This article has been rated as high-importance on the importance scale.
Additional information: This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-Class status: Referencing and citation: not checked Coverage and accuracy: not checked Structure: not checked Grammar: not checked Supporting materials: not checked Neutrality: not checked To fill out this checklist, please add the following to the template call: <!-- 1. It is suitably referenced, and all major points are appropriately cited. --> |B-Class-1=yes/no <!-- 2. It reasonably covers the topic, and does not contain major omissions or inaccuracies. --> |B-Class-2=yes/no <!-- 3. It has a defined structure, including a lead section and one or more sections of content. --> |B-Class-3=yes/no <!-- 4. It is free from major grammatical errors. --> |B-Class-4=yes/no <!-- 5. It contains appropriate supporting materials, such as an infobox, images, or diagrams. --> |B-Class-5=yes/no <!-- 6. It is written from a neutral point of view. --> |B-Class-6=yes/no

This page has been cited as a source by a media organization. The citation is in: "Will America escape the European Experience?", Brussels Journal, April 24, 2006. (details)

Contents 1 Requested Moves 1.1 Chinese Exclusion Act (United States) → Chinese Exclusion Act (Apr 2006) 1.1.1 Votes 1.2 Chinese Exclusion Act (United States) → Chinese Exclusion Act (Feb 2005) 1.2.1 Votes 1.2.2 Discussion 2 Discussion 2.1 chinese representation in the US 2.2 Just a question about the national quota 2.3 Restrictive immigration policies not limited to countries listed 2.4 removed link 2.5 How Did this get through congress?

[edit] Requested Moves

NOTE: The below discussion is from February 2005; the April 2006 discussion should be above this line.

[edit] Chinese Exclusion Act (United States) → Chinese Exclusion Act (Feb 2005)

Absurd redirect; no other nation has had a "Chinese Exclusion Act"; apparently the other meaning is a "nickname coined by the Chinese-Canadian community" for the Chinese Immigration Act. Neutrality^talk 06:50, Feb 5, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Votes

• Just a note to say that the name "Chinese Exclusion Act" suggests that it is an "Exclusion Act" that is Chinese, jguk 10:15, 5 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Oppose the common name of the Canadian Chinese Immigration Act is the "Chinese Exclusion Act." - SimonP 04:44, Feb 6, 2005 (UTC)
• Oppose Agree with SimonP BlankVerse 09:53, 7 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Support. We don't typically disambiguate between an official name and a nickname, especially when the former is the better known. →Raul654 06:48, Feb 9, 2005 (UTC)
• Oppose better known? The Chinese Immigration Act of Canada excluded Chinese almost entirely, while the Chinese Exclusion Act of the US just limited immigration, so the effect of thw two laws is most like the name of the other one. 70.51.11.101 22:59, 16 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Discussion

---

[edit] Discussion

[edit] chinese representation in the US

I deleted from the article this sentence: "It is also one of the primary reasons for why Chinese-Americans are slightly underrepresented in the United States (2% of the population) relative to the Han ethnic group's total percentage of the human species' population (about 20%)."

the US has never purported to represent the entire global population, only US population. So the fact that 20% of the globe's population is Han Chinese has no relevance to US representation.

[edit] Just a question about the national quota

I dont really think that the national quota was 105 immigrants but i dont know how much it really was so if someone could get that information.So Pro Lah 05:26, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

There is some apparent confusion here, I agree. If Chinese were excluded until the Act was repealed, then how is it that 70% of the hundreds of thousands of immigrants between 1910 and 1940 were allowed to remain? This apparent contradition should be explained in the article. -Jmh123 15:53, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Restrictive immigration policies not limited to countries listed

The United States was not the only country to have racially restrictive immigration policies.

China itself had had strict anti-foreigner laws, which were only slackened as a result of concessions forced by the European Powers after the Opium Wars. Immigration of foreign nationals today remains extremely difficult, should they choose to try (unless - perhaps? - they are of Han race). I don't think it's fair to single out "white" countries about restrictive immigration policies when all major states have had them, especially imperial ones; Japan, China, Bali, Thailand, the Ottoman Sultanate, and others. And even once admitted to such a state, strict policies on behaviour, locations of residence and type of profession, inheritance and more; not very much unlike the US, Canada or Australia, and in many cases (especially imperial China's, and Maoist China's) far worse. Skookum1 02:10, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

and then they were all like sup?

Skookum, you talk like a racist. Why do you single out Imperial China now? Because it's Chinese and the article is about racism towards ethnical chinese in new world colonies? Should we also add that the vile negroe Othello viciously strangled Desdemone in the articles on appartheid? Thehairthatdidntgrow 21:13, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] removed link

I just removed this link from the article page because it lists no actual content, but if anyone wanted to go to the archives to photocopy original documents for inclusion here it might be helpful. Calliopejen1 07:07, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

Chinese And Chinese Americans The National Archives-Pacific Region holds records of the Honolulu and San Francisco offices of the Immigration and Naturalization Service pertaining to Chinese immigration.

[edit] How Did this get through congress?

Will someone answer me this, the the fuck did a bill called the "Chinese Exclusion Act" get through congress w/o public dissent/ coup? were we that fucked up back then? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.116.188.176 (talk) 23:58, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Yes. Yes, we were. --Lquilter (talk) 00:32, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

Yes, as a matter of fact, this is one of many examples of the racist history of the United States. Kingturtle (talk) 01:11, 22 January 2008 (UTC)