<Begin Segment 4>

FA: You know the, okay, old senior citizens' organization. I'm going to throw a phrase out to you and I'd like you to repeat it and tell me if you agree or disagree. The ghost of Mike Masaoka still haunts the JACL.

RS: The ghost of Mike Masaoka still haunts the JACL. You know what? I understand what you're saying, and only because those who want to resurrect a ghost can do so. And that's where I said, shared collective responsibility was going to be the determinate factor in terms of our future. And when people refuse to do that -- it's too easy to point at Mike Masaoka who has been long gone and say he's the reason to blame, it's shared with all of those who perhaps may have felt similar towards the dissenters and who have not been able to forgive and forget and move on. And it's too easy. No, I don't blame Mike Masaoka, I blame the collective mentality of those who will follow rather than to think for themselves and, and who would rather be silent than to stand up and speak out for what is right. That's the problem.

[Interruption]

FC: Is it fair to say that you and the young staff, you and the Sansei staff, were let go because you were leading the JACL toward becoming a civil rights organization?

RS: Well, let me tell you what I heard from somebody who told me, one of the leaders on the board, let's put it this way, said, "Randy, I'm really concerned because people are telling me that we are leading -- i.e. you, staff -- are leading JACL on a treacherous path, vis-a-vis these issues of civil and human rights." That, that phrase haunts me more than, that goes to Mike Masaoka, because that's a living, that's a living word that I just heard not long ago from a breathing person. So, yeah, there are people who definitely, I think, wanted the national staff gone because all they were doing as stewards of the organization, carrying out what the board had decided upon as policy. And so it's easy to say maybe there were some sacrificial lambs put out there. The unfortunate part is when you cut off, cut off the commitment of those who were willing to step forward and implement those policies and take the criticism, you lose those people, then you've lost the thrust and the effectiveness of an organization on a national level.

FC: Try to shorten it up again. So the board had approved the civil rights, support for the civil rights issues. Could you start with that? The JACL board approved support for civil rights issues. And then I heard that this was said, treacherous path.

[Interruption]

RS: As soon as I was hired, the first board meeting I attended, I realized that there was a big controversy. The board had decided to implement and to support the same-sex marriage issue. And at the same time, discussions were going on about the dissenters and the role they played, that was an ongoing discussion that was an undercurrent unresolved. The board made these decisions on the civil rights issues for us to go out and articulate it and represent it. What I heard was someone saying, "You are leading the organization on a treacherous path," and we were just following the board's direction. I think that we were compromised because of our role in implementing the policies of the board.

<End Segment 4> - Copyright © 1996, 2005 Frank Abe and Densho. All Rights Reserved.