Japanese Shame Vs. American Shame

[Shinran]

Okay. I'm game to start this thread.

Japanese concept of shame regarding the three hostages who returned home to be treated worse than what they could have come up against in Iraq (psychologically) is substantially worse than what ANY American could possible dream of coming home to.

Americans are different in our yellow ribbon world while the Japanese are all about face and shame.

What are your thoughts?

[Shogun Empress]

Okay. I'm game to start this thread.

Japanese concept of shame regarding the three hostages who returned home to be treated worse than what they could have come up against in Iraq (psychologically) is substantially worse than what ANY American could possible dream of coming home to.

Americans are different in our yellow ribbon world while the Japanese are all about face and shame.

What are your thoughts?When I read American Shame, the first thought that came to my head was the capture of that American Taliban from Afghanistan.

[younggiftedandblack]

When I read American Shame, the first thought that came to my head was the capture of that American Taliban from Afghanistan.

I've been discussing this on several boards. My first reaction was like alot of people's that this was so wrong, but a couple of folks have given me another POV to look at.

They were told not to go to Iraq and they did so defying their governments wishes. The topic of "face" and "honor" came up and alot of people to my surprise applauded the way Japan handled the situation with the returnees.

[Shogun Empress]

I've been discussing this on several boards. My first reaction was like alot of people's that this was so wrong, but a couple of folks have given me another POV to look at.

They were told not to go to Iraq and they did so defying their governments wishes. The topic of "face" and "honor" came up and alot of people to my surprise applauded the way Japan handled the situation with the returnees.
They should move to America. They knew what they were getting into. They should have known better.

[Shinran]

They should move to America. They knew what they were getting into. They should have known better.
I'll agree with you. The Japanese people are a little strange, even to a JA like me. But, once you do something stupid and ignore the advice of your family and superiors, then you're askin' for trouble.

[ChinaLama]

They should move to America. They knew what they were getting into. They should have known better.


Oh Right. Everyone can just pack up their bags and move. :rolleyes:

[nameless]

(shouldn't this be in rant or whatever?)


Anyway, I think what the Japanese hostages did was admirable...but I can't say I disagree with the negative reaction they received, especially if they were explicitly told not to go.

If it were me in charge, I might be able to look past being disobeyed, but I couldn't ignore the fact that these handful of people put the nation/army in a position to decide the lives of a few defiant civilians vs. the lives of many soldiers (or rather, Japan's committment to the war).

[robotic]

i believe it does have a lot to do with culture. japan, historically, believes more in honor and dignity and the terms are taken more seriously - than compared to a country such as america. a pinpoint are the japanese kamikazes and 'suicide frogmen' during the second world war, including the samurai rituals to protect face and honor.
does it still exist within the younger generation, which are now more accustomed to western ideals, though?

one of the hostages, when at a hospital being treated for her injuries/psychological help, bowed her head sympathetically, which most people later found out to be a custom which meant "sorry for the trouble, but we thank you for your help"

[moser]

(shouldn't this be in rant or whatever?)

Anyway, I think what the Japanese hostages did was admirable...but I can't say I disagree with the negative reaction they received, especially if they were explicitly told not to go.

If it were me in charge, I might be able to look past being disobeyed, but I couldn't ignore the fact that these handful of people put the nation/army in a position to decide the lives of a few defiant civilians vs. the lives of many soldiers (or rather, Japan's committment to the war).

Exactly! In this case, although their intentions were good, it's like a parent who tells their kid not to do something, but the kid does it anyway. Kid gets in trouble, parent has to bend over backwards to get the kid out of trouble. I'd hardly expect the parent to reward the kid for disobeying and having the parent go though all that trouble, especially if it meant that the parent had to do something drastic (i.e. if kid was told not to gamble, parent may have to sell the house to pay off kid's debts).

[Shogun Empress]

Oh Right. Everyone can just pack up their bags and move. :rolleyes:
If they were to put some thought into what they were doing to their career and reputation, they probaly wouldn't have to pack up their bags and leave. They are responsible for their own actions. It will be hard living the rest of their life in shame down in Japan, so it would be best if they move to America where such selfish and selfless, dangerous acts are encouraged and rewarded.

[ChinaLama]

My point is: it's not so easy to move to America as you think it is.

[deez nuts]

not sure where to move this, gonna move it to histories, traditions and diaspora

[yoMAMA]

Okay. I'm game to start this thread.

Japanese concept of shame regarding the three hostages who returned home to be treated worse than what they could have come up against in Iraq (psychologically) is substantially worse than what ANY American could possible dream of coming home to.

Americans are different in our yellow ribbon world while the Japanese are all about face and shame.

What are your thoughts?

In china, after the korean war.....most of the chinese POWs returned home to be treated as traitors and cowards.......and many were purged [killed or inprisoned].........

don't know if its the commie culture or face value.....

[AliBabaIncorporated]

In china, after the korean war.....most of the chinese POWs returned home to be treated as traitors and cowards.......and many were purged [killed or inprisoned].........

don't know if its the commie culture or face value.....
More of a general fascist/totalitarian thing. Most dictatorships don't want any information about the outside world floating in through channels they can't understand. POWs had close contact with the outside world, at the very least with prison guards.

[sageb1]

I can relate to those 3 hostages, and don't begrudge them for do what they believed in.

Their reason in Iraq was to protest the war.

This is why I followed them closely in the hostage thread. I felt that they'd get scolded and shamed back in Japan. My heart goes out to them.

And for a moment, I felt like all of Japan is just like my mom.

Still, it is not surprising the hostages all acted respectful and begged forgiveness. That will work in their favor when this blows over in a couple weeks.

Here's an excerpt from the NY Times:

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/04/23/international/asia/23JAPA.html?ex=1398052800&en=7457902d6d26dbe2&ei=5007&partner=USERLAND

Dr. Satoru Saito, a psychiatrist who examined the three former hostages twice since their return, said the stress they were enduring now was “much heavier” than what they experienced during their captivity in Iraq. Asked to name their three most stressful moments, the former hostages told him, in ascending order: the moment when they were kidnapped on their way to Baghdad, the knife-wielding incident, and the moment they watched a television show the morning after their return here and realized Japan’s anger with them.

“Let’s say the knife incident, which lasted about 10 minutes, ranks 10 on a stress level,” Dr. Saito said in an interview at his clinic on Thursday. “After they came back to Japan and saw the morning news show, their stress level ranked 12.”

This article sums up the reason why I won't be grudge Imai Noriaki. He couldn't stop the SDF from leaving for Iraq, but each SDF member carries a radiation detector.

http://npo-hokkaido.org/imaisanen.htm


Here's an article by Imai:

http://www.n-and-h.co.jp/archive/imainoriakiev.html

Nahoko Takata's work with street kids in Baghdad is noteworthy.

Meanwhile the other two Japanese hostages Watanabe Nobutaka and Yasuda Jumpei criticized the natonal media "for echoing a government stance that blamed the captives and their families for putting Japan's military mission in Iraq at risk" according to Reuters.

http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?type=worldNews&storyID=4952272

"The government has asked the original three to pay back 2.37 million yen ($21,800) spent on flying them home and on Monday ruling party lawmaker Takeaki Kashimura, 60, accused them of being "anti-Japan elements as they are against government policies."

Watanabe said he would be happy to accept that label.

"I know that some politicians have said 'you are against Japan'... but I would like to say 'Yes, I am against Japan and thank you for recognizing my opinions'," he said. "

Watanabe too deseves to be heard. And yet, let's hope someone invites any of the hostages able to visit, to come to America.

Watanabe belongs to Gi Heisi, a civil rights group in Japan.
http://www.jca.apc.org/gi-heisi/

[applehead]

you pay for your actions.
i don't think they deserve the treatment they're
getting per se, but i don't think they don't deserve it either.
all right. so i just don't care about what's going on in japan.

[AngryABCGirl]

I'm just going to crosspost my former response to the other post.

According to the forces of history, Japan has developed a very strong aversion to war due to their atrocities in World War and people of their ethnicity imprisioned as well which has developed a very strong sense of shame. Most of Japan did not want to send any Japanese into Iraq in the first place and have lost countrymen. Then you have these civilians who go there on their own accord and find themselves caught up at the wrong place at the wrong time. Naturally people's orginal anger and being upset at the war intensifies as the world watches and panics about these civilians, bringing on a greater sense of shame and frustration at world events. Therefore they come home and get the brunt of that anger and the political scapegoating that comes with it. It seems to be much more of a consequence of malignant political moves with reactions in accordance to their political culture rather than any cultural deficiency.

In fact you could probably blame America for pushing political hands and greating a climate so that PM Koizumi had to push the envelope send int Japanese into Iraq and eventually put these people's lives in danger and end up racking up a high political and human cost...such devious politcal manuvering... such fucked up actions.... so AMERICAN.

[Shogun Empress]

What's the point of waging a war you cannot win? Whats the point of Japan bieng involved if we are to gain nothing from it? Why would we want to participate in America's newest Vietnam? Why go through what they have gone through before? Why should we repeat their mistakes? Japan has no military. Going to Iraq is useless. Mabye it would have been better if they stayed in Iraq.

[SunWuKong]

What's the point of waging a war you cannot win? Whats the point of Japan bieng involved if we are to gain nothing from it? Why would we want to participate in America's newest Vietnam? Why go through what they have gone through before? Why should we repeat their mistakes? Japan has no military. Going to Iraq is useless. Mabye it would have been better if they stayed in Iraq.

i feel that it's basically a political gesture on the part of Koizumi. in other words, he was trying to kiss Bush's ass.

[Shinran]

I disagree in whole with your statement.

The politics of being involved with America and Iraq was a humanitarian gesture to let the world know that Japan is part of the global village. The Japanese troops are there as a support role only, as the Consitution was written.

The military is there to provide help in rebuilding what America has destroyed in an unjust war based on lies and deciet.

While there is no honor in being part of the war, there is honor in providing help to those who cannot help themselves.

I applaud Koizumi for doing the right thing in supporting human rights, aiding those who have been ravaged by 30 years of tyranny and a vicious war waged on their homeland made worse by those who are not Iraqi citizens but foreign fighters.

[SunWuKong]

that sounds good in theory, but a lot of Japanese are actually against this move.
it's not exactly the first time that the US basically dictates the foreign policies of Japan (and Korea).

[amietron]

you pay for your actions.
i don't think they deserve the treatment they're
getting per se, but i don't think they don't deserve it either.
all right. so i just don't care about what's going on in japan.
what's that have to do with japanese shame vs american shame? you're saying you don't give a fuck about japan. why bother to post?


it all comes down to: the japanese are a proud people. even if it is in their own twisted way. and that's not to say that i agree or disagree. i think it's just the way they are or have been. their attitudes towards things. it's like, either stand up and make our country look good, or don't stand at all.

that sounds good in theory, but a lot of Japanese are actually against this move.
it's not exactly the first time that the US basically dictates the foreign policies of Japan (and Korea).
of course it's not. general mac arthur. the US has had something of an upper hand in a lot of matters within japanese politics, since world war II.

[Shogun Empress]

what's that have to do with japanese shame vs american shame? you're saying you don't give a fuck about japan. why bother to post?


it all comes down to: the japanese are a proud people. even if it is in their own twisted way. and that's not to say that i agree or disagree. i think it's just the way they are or have been. their attitudes towards things. it's like, either stand up and make our country look good, or don't stand at all.


of course it's not. general mac arthur. the US has had something of an upper hand in a lot of matters within japanese politics, since world war II.
I agree. It's hard explaining these things to non-Japanese so I will make an anology to clear things up a bit.

Say your in the Mafia. You get captured by the enemy. You were on their turf and pretty much had no business there because you weren't trying to gain riches or take over their turf. Somehow your enemy gets a wind of whats going on and captures you. Instead of killing you on sight, they question you and dig you for secrets. Finally they HAND you over to the authorities instead of killing you. Now what is the Don of your family supposed to think? What the fuck were you doing on their turf? Who told you to go there? Now look at all the unneccessary attention you've brought down on us! What was the point of risking your neck and embarassing us? Failure is very shameful for honorable Japanese. You might as well kill yourself and take one for the team.

Snitch.

[kasia]

i believe it does have a lot to do with culture. japan, historically, believes more in honor and dignity and the terms are taken more seriously - than compared to a country such as america.

if i recall correctly, bush apologized within a week for the abuse of prisoners in iraq. i've YET to hear the japanese government apologize for the nanking massacre. dignity and honor my ass.

[ChinaLama]

if i recall correctly, bush apologized within a week for the abuse of prisoners in iraq. i've YET to hear the japanese government apologize for the nanking massacre. dignity and honor my ass.
you till 'im kas.

[amietron]

it still comes down to the japanese are a proud people. in their minds, it's in the past, so it doesn't matter to them anymore. it's unimportant because it was a fault.

and to the japanese, then, it wasn't as wrong as it may be viewed today. it was wartime. they believed in their emperor and therefore, the cause they were fighting for was justified. fighting for japan, for the emperor, was honorable. that's why a lot of the soldiers who returned home, who didn't die in battle committed suicide, or thought themselves as being shameful to their families. that's why so many men were so willing to be kamikaze pilots. honor and dignity.

individuals in power have apologized for the atrocities committed during wwii, but not formally on behalf of the government or country. i don't think an apology from the japanese government is going to come anytime soon. it's not their style.

maybe you need to be japanese to understand.

[Kuchana]

it still comes down to the japanese are a proud people. in their minds, it's in the past, so it doesn't matter to them anymore. it's unimportant because it was a fault.

and to the japanese, then, it wasn't as wrong as it may be viewed today. it was wartime. they believed in their emperor and therefore, the cause they were fighting for was justified. fighting for japan, for the emperor, was honorable. that's why a lot of the soldiers who returned home, who didn't die in battle committed suicide, or thought themselves as being shameful to their families. that's why so many men were so willing to be kamikaze pilots. honor and dignity.

individuals in power have apologized for the atrocities committed during wwii, but not formally on behalf of the government or country. i don't think an apology from the japanese government is going to come anytime soon. it's not their style.

maybe you need to be japanese to understand.

how can the japanese people or rather the government not see that the past cannot stay in the past? just ignoring what happened in the past and being unapologetic about what they did makes their actions more damning than acknowledging it. it upsets me more that even the younger generation are not aware of what happened and japan's part in the crimes. as a result, many probably think that they're all lies just like some people believe the holocaust never happened. sorry girl i'm not ranting on you but just the whole principle of the matter. it's natural that once you do something wrong, you should feel remorse and apologize for it. really how hard can it be just say, "i'm sorry, what i did was wrong. please forgive me?" how long has it been since wwII? how long has it been since the crimes that japan committed?

how could the japanese soldiers see that what they did was justified, especially with the horrors that they committed?

i know i'm not japanese and maybe that's why i can't understand but surely it would be only human to have a guilty conscience.

i thought that germany apoligized for the holocaust?

don't hate me please! :frown:

[amietron]

how can the japanese people or rather the government not see that the past cannot stay in the past? just ignoring what happened in the past and being unapologetic about what they did makes their actions more damning than acknowledging it. it upsets me more that even the younger generation are not aware of what happened and japan's part in the crimes. as a result, many probably think that they're all lies just like some people believe the holocaust never happened. sorry girl i'm not ranting on you but just the whole principle of the matter. it's natural that once you do something wrong, you should feel remorse and apologize for it. really how hard can it be just say, "i'm sorry, what i did was wrong. please forgive me?" how long has it been since wwII? how long has it been since the crimes that japan committed?

how could the japanese soldiers see that what they did was justified, especially with the horrors that they committed?

i know i'm not japanese and maybe that's why i can't understand but surely it would be only human to have a guilty conscience.

i thought that germany apoligized for the holocaust?

don't hate me please! :frown:
well, you hit the nail on the head. like i said, it's a matter of pride. they don't want to "taint" their name with old dirt.

individuals of power have acknowledged the atrocities committed by japan.
-1991, PM miyazawa
-1993, PM hosokawa
-1995, PM murayama

they've expressed remorse for the events that took place, but choose not to apologize because the actions (at the time) were justified, in the name of the emperor. it's not an issue of the present anymore. it's not an issue, period. in their thinking, why dish out old dirt?

i agree with you that by not apologizing, it does make the situation worse, but it doesn't matter. pride and face amongst their own countrymen versus acceptance from outside people? it's a past issue that was already taken care of via "agreements", (not reparations) to each of the respective governments, not the individual victims. as part of this deal, japan built factories and helped to jump-start the economies of many SE asian countries.

[kuilong]

i thought that germany apoligized for the holocaust?

Yes, they have -- they've also done a lot of other things, such as reparations, banning Holocaust denial, identifying wartime criminals, and other things that Japan hasn't done. There's a lot of guilt in Germany over the Holocaust.

Why exactly is a "fault" unimportant?

The treatment of the Nanjing Massacre by Japanese textbooks (http://www.wellesley.edu/Polisci/wj/China/Nanjing/nanjing3.html) today is also interesting.

[Shinran]

We've done the same thing with all Asians here in the States. Our history books don't show the trail of discrimination and horrible atrocities done to non whites.

It's a national pride thing. I'm sure most countries do something like this.

[amietron]

The treatment of the Nanjing Massacre by Japanese textbooks (http://www.wellesley.edu/Polisci/wj/China/Nanjing/nanjing3.html) today is also interesting.
ah, the textbook controversies. given that, they choose not to apologize, or formally recognize the atrocities committed during the time, did you really think they'd put the honest to god truth down in their textbooks? nah.

[Shogun Empress]

The treatment of the Nanjing Massacre by Japanese textbooks (http://www.wellesley.edu/Polisci/wj/China/Nanjing/nanjing3.html) today is also interesting.I looked at that link. What's wrong with it?

[amietron]

Why Middle-School Students Should Not Be Taught About "Military Comfort Women"
by Fujioka Nobukatsu
Professor, Faculty of Education, Tokyo University



On 27 June 1996, Japan's Ministry of Education announced the results of its screening process for textbooks to be used by midde-school students starting in April 1997. Among them were social studies and history textbooks produced by seven publishers that contain references to "comfort women."

My overall impression from reading these textbooks is that their treatment of Japan's history is inordinately negative, even though they were designed for the use of Japanese students, at Japanese schools. This tendency is at its worst in sections describing the "comfort women."

I propose that all references to, "comfort women" be excised, mainly because I believe that including them violates the principles of education.

My reasons for objecting to the inclusion of material pertaining to "comfort women" or "military comfort women" in middle-school textbooks are as follows.


1 The references to comfort women contain inaccurate locutions.

The term "military comfort woman" (jugun ianfu -- literally, comfort woman attached to the military) did not exist prior to World War II. Terms like jugun kangofu (army nurse), jugun kisha (war correspondent), and jugun soryo (military chaplain) were part of the language. The word jugun is used to describe persons who are formally affiliated with the military, and who receive a salary from the military. This term cannot be applied to the comfort women, since they were recruited and transported to battle zones by private brokers. They were, without exception, private citizens who catered to the needs of military personnel, who paid them for services rendered. The term that accurately describes these people is simply "comfort women." Furthermore, the term "comfort women" was used to describe prostitutes who filled the needs of soldiers in battle zones, not those who plied their trade in Japan.

The locution "military comfort women" was first used in 1973 by SENDA Kako in his book of the same title (Jugun Ianfu). The book became a best-seller, and the term entered common parlance, but it has no historical basis. Jugun ianfu is nothing more than an inaccurate, inappropriate slang expression, one that creates misunderstandings about historical fact.


2 The references to comfort women contain distortions of historical fact.

All of the above-mentioned textbooks imply that the comfort women were transported to battle zones "against their will" by the Japanese military. They are depicted as "sex slaves" whose movements were restricted, and who were forced to satisfy the sexual needs of Japanese soldiers.

Such portrayals distort the facts. The truth is that comfort women were simply prostitutes who were transported to battle zones by private brokers. There are no written documents that attest to the fact that these women were recruited or confined by any Japanese military organization.

The military authorities did, in fact, oversee the supervision of these women, though there are some who would find fault with that. Nevertheless, the authorities arranged for medical examinations for the women, to ensure that Japan's soldiers remained in good health. They also transported and protected the comfort women, when necessary, under the most extraordinary of circumstances, i.e., in a war situation. However, the comfort stations were not managed by the military authorities, but by private brokers.

Admittedly, not all of these women went to battle arenas of their own free will. Many of them must have been deceived by false promises, or ordered to cooperate with or even sold off to brokers by their parents. One cannot help sympathizing with those women. But in those days, when both Japan and Korea were much less prosperous than they are now, such incidents were not unusual. It is unfair to place undue emphasis on the comfort women without explaining the circumstances of the times.


3 The references to comfort women include fabricated information, based solely on dubious "testimonies."

One of the selections is a "testimony" pro-vided by a Japanese national who claims that he was involved in the "forcible transport" of comfort women. This is an excerpt from a book entitled My War Crimes: The Forcible Transport of Korean Nationals, written by YOSHIDA Seiji. Research into this "testimony," conducted in Korea by Chiba University Professor HATA Ikuhiko, has revealed that it is totally fictitious. In postwar Japan, the exposition of anti-Japanese sentiments has become a sort of business. It is obvious that Yoshida's "testimony" falls into this category. Claiming that these women were "forcibly transported" on the basis of one "testimony," a testimony that has been thoroughly discredited, at that, is tantamount to advocating the fabrication of history.


4 By using this material, Japan's educational system is teaching a double standard, one that denigrates the Japanese, and only the Japanese.

Some argue that references to comfort women should be included in textbooks because they believe that children should be taught that prostitution is evil, under any circumstances, and in any era. If these references are to be included for that reason, then students must also be taught that prostitution was legal in Japan, even after World War II, until 1958.

Furthermore, the problem of soldiers and sex is one that has been with us throughout all of human history. This is a topic worthy of contemplation, but Japanese soldiers were not the only ones for whom comfort women were necessary. If we are going to include descriptions of comfort stations in textbooks, we must put them into perspective by mentioning that the armed forces of other nations also established such facilities. For instance, when American soldiers occupied Sicily in 1943, they inherited the comfort stations that had been operated by the German and Italian military, along with the comfort women who had been working there. Incidents like this one must also be included, especially those that took place in postwar Japan. However, one wonders what purpose is served by including trivial information of this sort, since it disturbs the balance of the whole.

By placing undue emphasis on comfort women who served Japanese soldiers prior to World War II, and only them, and by failing to mention the comfort women who served soldiers of other nations, both in the past and today, we are advocating a double standard. The postwar period has been marked by the delusion that it is virtuous to despise and deprecate Japan and the Japanese people, a delusion that is particularly widespread in intellectual circles. The espousal of such ideas can only lead to moral decline and intellectual decadence.


5 Teaching children about comfort women may have harmful effects on their personalities.

There is no education merit in describing comfort women or prostitutes in textbooks. Nothing is to be gained from delving into the darker aspects of human nature at this early stage in students lives. As they grow into adulthood, students will acquire knowledge of this sort on their own. Material like this should not be included in textbooks, nor should teachers be discussing it in the classroom, given the limited amount of time devoted to school education.

Each time I read one of the "testimonies" about comfort women, my reaction is one of displeasure, even if I am certain that the information it contains is spurious.

Here is an excerpt from a "testimony" written by a woman named Lee Bok Nyo, and printed in the North Korean newspaper Rodong Shinmun.

"Once I saw a Japanese soldier decapitate a Chinese he had captured. After he had boiled the head in a pot, he impaled it on a long pole so that everyone could see it. Then he forced the comfort women to drink the liquid in which the head had been boiled."

The custom of preparing soup in this way exists nowhere in Japanese culinary tradition. The Japanese have never been wont to prepare soup from pigs' or cows' heads, much less human heads. They base their soups upon the products of the sea, such as dried sardines or dried bonito. Obviously, the author wasn't aware of this fact.

As I read this "testimonial," I was reminded of a scene from a North Korean propaganda film, Chonlima, which l saw during my student days in the mid-1960's. The purpose of the film was to show the world how prosperous North Korea had become under the leadership of Kim Il Sung. One of the vignettes intended to demonstrate that "prosperity" showed a pig's head boiling vigorously in a large pot. Most of the members of the audience who believed in Marxism (myself included) had been dreamily absorbed in the film. But the reaction to this scene was one of disgust and displeasure. Actually, there is a dish called [sorurontan] in North Korea, the preferred version of which is prepared by skinning and butchering a steer, placing all its parts (meat, bones, and entrails), except for the hide, in a large pot, and boiling it for several hours.

Since the end of the war, the Japanese have acquired a self-deprecatory mind set that allows them to accept the "testimonies" of Korean and Chinese nationals, the "victims" of war and of Japanese militarism, as unquestionable fact. Though I have always felt distaste at hypocritical outbursts inspired by this mind set, I have tended to distance myself from the issue of the comfort women. However, it never occurred to me for a moment that references to North Korean "military comfort women" would be included in textbooks intended for middle-school students, for children. I feel that this eventuality is a result of my having failed to give serious consideration to the history of my own nation, because such an activity would have been unpleasant. My realization of this fact was accompanied by great regret.

Young Japanese are no longer proud of their nation. The majority of university students feel ashamed to be Japanese. In fact, history classes in which even the current editions of textbooks are used have caused middle-school students to perceive Japan as the most evil nation in the world.

Therefore, the deliberate inclusion of references to comfort women, at least in the way it has been done in textbooks approved by the Ministry of Education, is not only pointless, but also harmful. It gives credence to accusations that the Japanese are more lustful, lecherous, and stupid than the citizens of any other nation by insinuating that they are so in textbooks used in the venues of compulsory education. It is extremely unfortunate that the Ministry does not realize that it is cruel to brainwash Japanese middle-school students in this way.

I urge the Minister of Education to order the publishers of these textbooks to excise articles relating to comfort women, in accordance with the rules governing textbook screening.

The Iniquities of History Education in Japan During the Postwar Period:
The Utter Senselessness of Japan's Postwar History Education and History Textbooks
by NAMIKAWA Eita


When I examine Japan's his-tory textbooks, the first thing I notice is the plethora of dates therein.

"When did MINAMOTO Yoritomo become shogun?"
"In 1192."

"When was the Battle of Sekigahara fought?"
"In 1600."

This is how history classes are conducted at most of Japan's middle and high schools. The focus is on the memorization of dates, the memorization of events, and the memorization of the names of historical figures. But when they learn those names, students are never encouraged to delve any deeper. They are never encouraged to gain a profound understanding of history, to inquire into the psychology of historical figures, or into the circumstances of the various eras of history. No attempt is made to go beyond this superficial approach. This sort of instruction stifles children's curiosity about history. The seeds of education are sowed, but they are never allowed to germinate. History classes are eroding the minds of our children.


The Recording of Modern History: Inconsistencies and Lies
I am also appalled by the information found in modern history textbooks. History is an accumulation of realities. Humans and nations, caught up in the midst of those realities, have no choice but to manage as best they can. Both individuals and nations, collections of individuals, are saddled with the inevitable fate of deciding how they are going to live under the circumstances with which they are faced.

This is the most obvious theme in analyses of events that took place at the end of the Tokugawa Shogunate (1603-1867) and during the Meiji Restoration. Why are there so many anti-Japanese historians who insist on stating everything in terms of black and white? When they discuss China, they declare that Japan was the aggressor, and China the aggrieved. But a close examination of relations between Japan and China over the past 3,000 years reveals that the tribute system and all the ceremonies connected with it, in which tributary states were required to demonstrate subservience and deference, is a Chinese system and a product of the Chinese mentality. The notion that Japan is a tributary of China, however latent, has always been at the basis of Chinese thought. The point of departure for every aspect of Japan's relations with China is the former's 3,000year-long fear of being colonized by China. We must not forget that the first conflict between the two nations was, in fact, the invasion of Japan by a combined Chinese and Korean fleet, and eliminating the Chinese threat was one of Japan's national priorities. Such events must be taken into consideration in any discussion of the Sino-Japanese War. The failure to do so is tantamount to abandoning the idea of authentic historiography.

What about Japan's relations with Russia, another threat? Near the end of the Tokugawa Shogunate (1792), a ship carrying the Russian Army officer Laksman appeared offshore from Hokkaido. It was just a matter of time before obsessively expansionist Russia would attempt to annex Japan. Statesman TAKASUGI Shinsaku went to Shanghai. At that time, China was reeling from the Opium Wars. Takasugi was terrified that Japan, too, would fall prey to the Western powers. Russia, having already made inroads into China, had its eye on Korea. The conventional wisdom of the times among analysts of the East Asian situation was that Japan would be next.

It was an Amcrican, Matthew Perry, who pried open Japan's gates. Agreements were concluded, all of them unequal, unjust treaties that were forced down Japan's throat. Evidence demonstrating Japan's semi-enslavement continued to appear. Isolationists werc transformed into internationalists. This was not so much apostasy on their parts, but a deliberate, desperate political choice rooted in reality. In the Shimonoseki Incident, Choshu (now part of Yamaguchi Prefecture) battled warships from Britain, the United States, France, and the Netherlands, and was swiftly defeated. Amid that upheaval, Takasugi displaying masterful eloquence in the performance of a lifetime, managed to circumvent England's demands to lease Shimonoseki. The leaders of Satsuma (now Kagoshima) and Choshu realized, early on, the path that Japan must choose. They had learned through experience that the foreigners could not be defeated. They decided that, rather than "expelling the barbarians," Japan should, at least temporarily, acquiesce to unequal treaties, and then proceed to absorb Western technological, military, industrial, and educational expertise, which it would then adapt to its own needs. The young men who led Japan in the latter days of the Tokugawa Shogunate and during the Meiji Restoration resolved to reach a state of parity with, and then overtake, the Western powers.

"If" is, apparently, a word that has no place in a discussion of history. However, unless we question past events, where will we get the energy to create new history? Anti-Japanese historians claim that the "enrich the nation, strengthen the military" policy was retrogressive. I would like to ask them what would have happened if Japan had opted for unarmed neutrality at that time. If it had, my name would probably be Namikawaski, or perhaps Namikawanovsk. I am astonished at the hypocrisy and thoughtlessness of these "historians." Nor do they have anything good to say about the abolition of feudal domains and the establishment of prefectures. Anyone who doubts me need only look at discussions of that process in Japan's history textbooks. We must be mindful that the abolition of the feudal structure left Japan's warriors without any means of livelihood. Though the transition was fraught with seemingly insurmountable difficulties, the new policy was implemented and, remarkably, not one drop of blood was spilled. The reaction from young warriors in every domain was one of disbelief and indignation. The desperate clan leaders responded to their outrage by explaining that the warriors of Japan had one, and only one, choice: abandon their clans for a greater cause, that of a nation. They must take on a new mission helping Japan overcome the threat of foreign invasion. Western historians write that had a similar attempt been made in Europe, 400 years of bloodshed would have ensued.

According to the anti-Japanese Marxists, even the Meiji Restoration was a historical setback, a return to absolute monarchy. Doctrine and ideology (and self-righteousness) are passing judgement on facts and circumstances. Do they realize what would have happened if Japan had been without the unifying force the Meiji imperial system? Would it have been possible to create a national order and to cultivate a national spirit?

There was an element of luck, too. Britain, probably the only nation capable of colonizing Japan, was exhausted by the Crimean War. France was preoccupied with the management of its colonies, expending most of its energy in attempts to suppress uprisings there, or to eradicate epidemics. Like Britain, Russia had been debilitated by the Crimean War. The United States had been sundered by the Civil War and, even after that ended, had to devote its full attention to maintaining order and to reconstruction. Meiji Restoration leaders knew that the time was right, and they did not let the opportunity slide by. They immediately launched Japan on the path to survival. I have something to say to the many anti-Japanese histori-ans who wish to characterize the Japanese national character as unequivocally aggressive. Why was our nation closed during the 300 years of Tokugawa reign? The peace that prevailed during that time has been described by Toynbee and other eminent historians as one of the wonders of history. Japan never intended to become an aggressor. Our forefathers did not flinch in the face of a genuine threat, i.e., invasion by world powers, particularly Russia. They refused to be enslaved. Instead, they bravely sought national and ethnic independence, dignity, peace, and pride. I do not claim that this nation has never made a mistake, nor that it has never committed an injustice. A nation is a community of individuals. Those individuals experience the entire spectrum of emotions. They have flaws, and they make mistakes. But can we excuse such contempt, such deprecation, such persecution of this nation's modern history? When we look at Japan's history textbooks, we are given to think that Japan has done nothing right, that Japan is to blame for everything bad that has ever happened.


The Destruction of Japan: A Real Danger
Underlying the anti-Japanese perception of history is the categorical negation of the nation of Japan. Pressed to accuse Japan of acts even more unspeakably evil than the dropping of atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki ("experiments" on human beings that were absolutely unnecessary) and the firebombing of Tokyo, the United States perpetrated another unconscionable act. At the International Military Tribunals for the Far East, held in Tokyo, the victors passed judgement on the vanquished.

Toward the end of the war, the Soviet Union crossed the border between the U.S.S.R. and Manchuria, and proceeded to torture and kill 75,000 Japanese citizens women, children, and the aged. Nevertheless, even the U.S.S.R. is deemed virtuous because it joined the Allies in the fight against fascism, a dubious cause where Japan is concerned, since Japan was never a fascist state. Japanese history and culture, however, are viewed as evil incarnate. This view overlaps with the "new" Soviet Comintern's perception of history. Stalin was unequivocal when he expressed his hope that Japan would be obliterated.

The Tokyo Tribunal's and Comintern's perceptions of history, rooted in deep-seated grudges, a lust for revenge, and anti-Japanese sentiments, have controlled history education in this nation throughout the postwar years. For 50 years, Japanese children have been taught history in such a way as to promote the decline, weakening, and even the extinction of their country.

The purpose of history education is give our children an opportunity to learn their nation's past, its history and culture, to encourage them to take pride in its achievements and to avoid repeating its mistakes. To that end, they must be taught both the admirable and the unfortunate aspects of Japanese history. This means teaching them the true facts. Otherwise, we cannot inspire our young people to be optimistic about the future, to face life's challenges, to be good citizens, or to create a better society. Even when I take a second look at today's history textbooks, I see no signs of affection on the part of the authors. By affection, I mean the desire to help our children derive pleasure and hope from being Japanese. Discussions of the makings of an ideal nation or of an ideal Japanese, or the role of history, are nowhere to be found in these textbooks. I would not be stretching my point much if I said that we are torturing our children. In any case, by presenting such a shoddy version of history, we are mistreating them, and endangering our nation's future. By lowering the quality of history textbooks, we are committing a crime against our children. This nation's politics, economic, financial administration, and bureaucracy have created a national debt that our children will be forced to bear for 60 years hence. If they compound that crime by continuing to corrupt history education, the framework of human existence, what kind of future can we expect for Japan?

While I was writing this article, the incident at the Japanese Embassy in Lima, Peru, in which hostages were taken, was resolved. The way in which it was resolved has and will continue to be analyzed from a variety of viewpoints. What I would like to mention here is the position taken by President Fujimori, and how it reminded me of the virtues that the Japanese once possessed. In making the decision to take the Embassy by force, he turned his back even on the "envoy from Heaven," the Bishop of Rome. President Fujimori did not tell the Japanese government what he intended to do. Suppose that a great number of the hostages had been killed. Who would have taken responsibility? He chose not to share the responsibility with Prime Minister Hashimoto, nor with anyone else. He bore the cross alone. That sort of noblesse oblige has disappeared from Japan. All the virtues that have been built in this nation throughout its history -- learning, loyalty, diligence, thrift, patience, courage, a sense of justice, sacrifice, pride, faith are on the verge of extinction. When the young people of Japan were asked if they would defend their country if invaded by another nation, 10% of them answered "yes." Ninety percent replied that they would not. Over 70% of the world's young people say that they would defend their countries. When Americans and Koreans were asked if they would sacrifice their interests to serve their countries, 56.9% and 54.4% answered "yes," respectively. Only 5.5% of Japanese respondents answered that question in the affirmative. That figure is suggestive of what is at the depth of our national psychology. The foolish obsession with economic matters on the part of the Japanese, and their failure to contemplate the proper way for humans to live, have characterized the 50 years since World War II ended. The result is that the very future of our nation is in jeopardy. I am reminded of the last days of Carthage.

The inclusion of material describing "comfort women" in textbooks is also evidence of this country's pathology. When we write our history textbooks, we weigh every word, fearful of the reaction from neighboring nations. This is the epitome of intellectual and volitional decadence, and of a nation ideologically and spiritually enslaved. Even a trivial error precipitates ranting from our neighbors which, in turn, causes the heads of our nation's ministers to fall. Japan is not a sovereign nation.

Once I had an interview with KOSUGI Takashi, the Minister of Education. I was moved to tears upon seeing the person responsible for the education of an entire nation reduced to a flustered silence, fearful of saying something that could be construed as an impropriety. Japan has become the weakest nation in the world, a nation devoid of courage and justice. Unless we offer quality history education, unless we produce quality textbooks, this nation is doomed. It was with this conviction that I left the minister's office.

Thoughts on History Education

by SAKAMOTO Takao
Professor, Gakushuin University


In the summer of 1996, it became known that all seven history textbooks to be used at Japan's middle schools, starting with the following school year, contained references to the "military" comfort women. Subsequently, public attention was drawn to this issue, and many animated debates about middle-school history textbooks took place.

Not that the history textbooks intended for middle-school students preceding those under discussion were without flaws. The special brand of ideology that pervades them had been the target of a great deal of criticism.

Nevertheless, most ordinary citizens did not know what sort of history education was being conducted in Japan's middle and high schools. Nor did they have more than a vague perception about the textbooks that were used.

However, the inclusion of material concerning "military" comfort women triggered a new volley of criticism. The special brand of ideology permeating history textbooks had become so dominant that even references to "military" comfort women had been included in them, and it was those references that awakened the public to the problem.

This wave of interest was motivated largely by the fact that the references to the "military" comfort women have to do with sex, a subject that must be handled with extreme care. The public was upset or displeased that a phenomenon that occurred in an extraordinary environment, i.e., a war situation, should be addressed, and so imprudently, in middle-school history textbooks.

Conventional wisdom has always dictated that accounts of sexual activity that society deems unconventional should be handled with kid gloves. Until recently, they had not appeared in elementary or middle-school history textbooks, nor was their inclusion considered justifiable.

Though some view modern-day prostitution with distaste, they may believe that descriptions of Yoshiwara and other pleasure quarters of the Edo Period (1600 -1867) should be included, as a cultural phenomenon. However, even they have never been mentioned in textbooks.

To support my arguments regarding the suitability of including references to the "military" comfort women in middle-school history textbooks, I need only mention the criteria that are used during the textbook screening process, criteria that must be met before a textbook is approved.



1 Textbooks may not contain material that children (students) would have difficulty in understanding, or that they are likely to misunderstand.
2 Textbooks may not state conclusions about events that have not been corroborated.
3 Textbooks may not contain accounts that unduly emphasize extraordinary events, or that treat those events in a one-sided manner, with-out due consideration.


These criteria notwithstanding, textbooks that contain references to "military" comfort women were, in fact, approved. This is a subject that is certainly difficult for middle-school students to comprehend, and it begs misinterpretation. Some aspects have yet to be historiographically confirmed. Furthermore, all textbooks are subject to space constraints. Therefore, there seems to be no pressing need to include material of this sort in history textbooks.

Baffled by the inclusion of references to the "military" comfort women in middleschool textbooks, I am forced to assume that there must be a specific reason for insisting that they are indispensable.

Those who favor the inclusion of such material would probably present two arguments. The first is that we must make a concerted effort to use history education to awaken the Japanese to their past crimes. The second is that it is mistaken to view the comfort women system as equivalent to ordinary prostitution. It must be viewed as an evil spawned by war.

The first argument, of course, causes one to wonder whether the purpose of history education is to make students aware of the sins of their forefathers, sidestepping the aforementioned screening rules and all other pedagogical considerations. Another question comes to mind: what are the objectives of history education? Given the role that history education is intended to fulfill, which I will discuss below, I do not believe that the goal of education is to give special priority to awakening students to the sins of the past at the expense of all other educational priorities.

My response to the second argument is that, in any discussion of the comfort women system, one must be aware that the system itself and sex-related war crimes that took place in war zones have been confused in many cases. Sexual crimes against civilians are war crimes forbidden by the Japanese military penal code. They must be treated differently from the comfort women system, which operated in war zones.

Those who advocate the inclusion of references to the "military" comfort women in textbooks believe that large numbers of comfort women were kidnapped, rounded up like cattle, and transported to war zones. If this belief were based on fact, then we would have no choice but to view those actions as evil deeds perpetrated during a war or, rather, we would have to view the system per se as criminal. However, it is now common knowledge that the only basis for this belief is a book entitled My War Crimes: The Forcible Transport of Korean Nationals, written by YOSHIDA Seiji, which an investigation conducted by Professor HATA Ikuhiko has thoroughly discredited.

When those who denounce the transport of comfort women against their will could not prove that they were, in fact, forcibly transported, they began to argue that the circumstances in which the comfort women existed were barbaric, and that their human rights were violated. However, the denouncers must at least prove, within the framework of ethical principles prevailing at that time, that the living standards of the comfort women were indeed inhumane, and that Japan's system was much more sadistic than those of other nations. They must also prove that it is impossible to present an accurate picture of Japan during that period without including accounts of the comfort women. Otherwise, there is no reason to give the topic priority over other pedagogical considerations, to include it in textbooks, or to teach our children about it.

By now, it should be obvious to the reader that it is not appropriate to include references to the "military" comfort women issue in middle-school textbooks, from two standpoints: educational considerations and the desirability of presenting authenticated historical facts.

I would now like to discuss the principles of history education, in light of the problems I have indicated above.

The point of departure for any discussion of history education is the realization that the object of history education is not the same as that of politics or historiography. Each of these three processes is based on distinctly different principles. At the same time, all three are subtly interconnected, and each affects the others. However, we must, in principle, consider them separate realms.

In the realm of politics, the resolution of domestic and foreign problems, when they arise, takes precedence. Therefore, when complications arise with another nation involving situations that occurred in the past, a political decision based on the prudent judgement of the current government may be necessary, such as an apology.

In contrast, historiography must be independent of political judgement. It must be completely unbiased and objective. The world consists of many nations, and in some of them historiographers are constrained by the agendas of the reigning political authorities. However, they cannot be considered civilized nations.

History education is, as I will discuss later, intimately connected with the development of a national consciousness. Therefore, it cannot be totally divorced from politics. But when history education interlocks with individual political decisions, and indirectly accounts for them, we know that it has been corrupted.

I would like to note here that the recording of history by historiographers and the recording of history in textbooks overlap, but they are separate disciplines. There are many types of historiography, e.g., the history of the evolution of agricultural techniques, the history of fashion, the history of toilet construction, and the history of crime in Japan.

Thus, historiography can examine a broad range of topics, and this is something to be desired. Its value is determined by the appropriateness of research methods used and the competence of the conclusions it reaches.

The objectives of history education, however, are necessarily different from those of historiography. If the focus of elementary and middle-school history classes were the history of crime, for instance, most people would be puzzled. Whether or not the "military" comfort women issue warrants coverage in textbooks hinges on this very point. The question that must be asked in determining approaches to history education is not "What should we study?" It is "What should we teach?"

Of course, historiography and history education have many aspects in common. One of them is the idea of extending one's temporal perspective by examining the various ages, ethnic groups, societies, and lifestyles that the world has known. This approach enables us to view the present, informed by the past.

Another is that the new discoveries and achievements of historical research must be reflected in history education. When Theory A in a particular field of historiography has been deemed predominant, history textbooks that present Theory B, its predecessor, as predominant should be revised. When errors resulting from the recording of history with an ideological bias come to light, we must not perpetuate them.

The academic approach of today's text-books reflects the ideology of kozaha Marxism [the "lecture" faction of Japanese Marxism; the name derives from a publica-tion entitled Lectures on the History of the Evolution of Socialism in Japan], which pre-vailed in the late 1940's and 1950's. History is viewed as the process that culminates in socialism, and is often portrayed as a class struggle between the oppressed and their oppressors. For instance, in references to the Edo Period, there is inordinate emphasis on the exploitation and heavy taxation of farmers. This portrayal deviates significantly from recent historical research on that period. The view that those in power are always evil, and the masses are always oppressed is ever-present. Some textbooks even resort to the use of cartoons to emphasize this slant, which serves only to reveal the authors' narrow outlook on history and on life, and the poverty of spirit with which they approach history.

I am convinced that even a revision of history textbooks from an academic standpoint would result in a huge improvement in quality.

However, history education involves considerations other than academic issues that must be addressed. The mission of history education is to teach children historical facts, but those facts must be indispensable to an understanding of orthodox history. Of course, one must first articulate what is meant by "orthodox," which is not easy to do. Nevertheless, it is true that we Japanese share a certain vague perception of the outline of Japanese history. For instance, a version of history that does not include Shotoku Taishi (574-622) [among this regent's many accomplishments was the drafting of Japan's first constitution], the Battle of Sekigahara (1600), or the Meiji Restoration (1868-1912) would be considered unorthodox by anyone. Similarly, most people would not call a work that represents the history of the Japanese lifestyle by describing the history of toilet construction "orthodox Japanese history."


Of course, there are many borderline topics, topics that we have difficulty deciding whether or not to include. Such topics are too numerous to mention, but if the question were, say, whether to include KUSUNOKI Masashige (1294?-1336) [one of Japan's greatest military strategists] or KOJIMA Takanori [a 12th century warrior whose exploits are described in literature, but whose existence remains undocumented], we would probably all decide upon the former without much argument.

I find this phenomenon somewhat amazing. There were other figures besides ODA Nobunaga, TOYOTOMI Hideyoshi, and TOKUGAWA Ieyasu who fulfilled important roles during the Warring States Era (1338 - 1573), but our image of that era is centered around these three men.

How was this image of orthodox Japanese history formed? And why are we able to form a mental picture of orthodox Japanese history? A continuously evolving tradition, which dictates how Japanese history is recorded, and which has established itself, is a key factor.

The Edo Period saw the compilation of History of Great lapan at Mito. When ARAI Hakuseki looked back at Japanese history, he was able to refer to KITABATAKE Chikafusa's (1293 - 1354) Record of the Legitimate Succession of the Divine Emperors and History of the East (early 13th century), upon which he based A Reading of Political History (1712).

Then, at the end of the Tokugawa Shogunate, when RAI Santyo wrote An Unofficial History of Japan (1827), he in turn referred to History of Great Japan and other histories and historical treatises. When the Meiji Era dawned, historiography burgeoned, relying again on the historical writings that had gone before. Thus, a tradition of orthodox history was cultivated, which determined which historical figures and facts would be documented, and how they would be documented.

When we write history textbooks for our children, we are affirming the historiographical tradition that we have inherited, translating mental images of orthodox history into words. Tradition is not static; it acquires new elements over time, and corrections are made to it. A sort of tapestry, into which the prevailing research levels of each era are woven, tradition, the foundation of our judgement, lives on.

Thus, we must note that the main purpose of history education is the nurturing of a national consciousness. That national consciousness is based upon the common ground of orthodox history. History education at the elementary and middle-school levels is enormously instrumental in the for-mation of a national consciousness (the awareness that we are members of one nation, that we are Japanese).

The leading Western nations became nation-states in the latter part of the nineteenth century. As more of the populace began to participate in politics, the nurturing of a sense of national unity became a priority. It was then that the compilation of history textbooks for elementary and mid-dle-school students began.

In that age, it was considered necessary to instill an awareness of "we," i.e., the citizens of a nation, in the minds of the people. The study of "national history" emerged as the prime means of sustaining that sense of "we," that identity. National histories have been compiled by reflecting on the legacy of those who created nations. Now we must determine how that legacy can best be used in the future, and create new textbooks so that it may be transmitted to our children.

About the Japanese Society for History Textbook Reform


1 Background
The Japanese Society for Textbook Reform was established in January 1996. Its members, all volunteers, are united by their concern about the current state of history education in Japan, which is colored by a masochistic perception of history. The Society is supported by annual dues of Y6,000 (c. 45 U.S. dollars) and by contributions. As of March 1999, its members numbered 8,288. More than 50 members are Japanese citizens residing in other countries. The membership represents all segments of society, and includes corporate executives, business owners, scholars, novelists, critics, artists, business people, engineers, educators, homemakers, and students. Additionally, 240 of Japan's financial, academic, and labor leaders, and other prominent citizens (writers, physicians, and attorneys) have lent their names and moral support to our work.



2 Key Members
Chairman NISHIO Kanji, Ph. D., is a professor at the University of Electro-Communications, whose specialties are German literature and philosophy. His research on Nietzsche has been highly acclaimed. Professor Nishio is also one of Japan's leading commentators on civilization.

FUJIOKA Nobukatsu, one of the Society's vice presidents, is professor of education at Tokyo University. He also heads the "Association for the Advancement of a Liberalist View of History," an organization whose membership includes both educators and non-educators, and whose purpose is to encourage an unbiased, balanced approach to our nation's history and to history education.

NAMIKAWA Eita, the other vice president, is an advocate of private education. He has written many books, and heads the New Shokason Juku, a private school patterned after the Shokason Juku of the late Edo era, and dedicated to education in its ideal form.

SAKAMOTO Takao, an intended history textbook writer of our society, is a professor at Gakushuin University. His expertise in the history of Japanese political thought has won him many awards for his writings on the subject.

ITO Takashi, Ph.D., is a professor at the Graduate Institute for Policy Studies, and professor emeritus of Tokyo University. He is the preeminent researcher on modern Japanese history. The Society is preparing civics textbooks, in addition to history textbooks.

NISHIBE Susumu, the principal author of the civics textbooks, formerly taught at Tokyo University, and currently publishes Hatsugensha (Monthly Speak-Out Magazine), a leading opinion magazine. Mr. Nishibe enjoys a fine reputation as a critic and writer, and is a vigorous advocate of social reform. There are also six directors, who meet each month to set guidelines for the Society's activities.

KOBAYASHI Yoshinori, known for his immensely popular political and social satire cartoons, e.g., Gomanizumu Sengen (A Declaration of Arrogant-ism), participates in the Institute's activities in the capacity of honorary director.



Directors:

NISHIO, Kanji, Chairman, Professor, University of Electro-Communications

FUJIOKA, Nobukatsu, Vice Chairman, Professor, Tokyo University

NAMIKAWA, Eita, Vice Chairman, President, New Shokason Juku

HAGA, Toru, Professor, Taisho University

ITO, Takashi, Professor, Graduate Institute for Policy Studies

NAKAJIMA, Shuzo, Attorney at law

NISHIBE, Susumu, Critic

SAKAMOTO, Takao, Professor, Gakushuin University

TAKAHASHI, Shiro, Professor, Meisei University

TAKAMORI, Meichoku, Lecturer, Kokugakuin University



3 Main Activities
The Society is in the process of editing history and civics textbooks for middleschool students. We will make a concerted effort toward their adoption and widespread use, starting with the 2002 school year.

Prior to the publication of history textbooks, the Society will issue a pilot edition of The History of a Nation (in June 1999), written by Chairman Nishio. The History of a Nation and the textbooks share the same philosophy, but the former is intended for a wide audience, and will contain three times more information than the latter. Our hope is that The History of a Nation will become a bestseller (over a million copies), aid in the dissemination of the Society's philosophy, and inspire grassroots public support for our new history textbooks.

We will engage in other activities, such as the sponsoring of symposia and the issuing of reports and other publications, all designed to gain society's understanding of and support for the Society's activities.

We will engage in research covering a broad range of topics, e.g., the textbook situation in other nations.

We will encourage interchange with like-minded persons in other nations. (This booklet is one step in that direction.)

[Shogun Empress]

*deleted*

[Tang]

Japanese Shame Vs American Shame

American: We apolgize for what happened in Iraq, and seriously condemn those actions committed by our soldiers.

Japanese: We're very regretful of all the harm caused. But what shame?

[bigwong235]

individuals in power have apologized for the atrocities committed during wwii, but not formally on behalf of the government or country. i don't think an apology from the japanese government is going to come anytime soon. it's not their style.


not their style? so that's how first world governments work...

[Shogun Empress]

not their style? so that's how first world governments work...
The United States will start paying out reperations to every African-American before any apology Japan makes finally satisfies China and Korea.

[Tang]

The United States will start paying out reperations to every African-American before any apology Japan makes finally satisfies China and Korea.

What a load of red horseshit.

We deserve the apology and Japan owe us one for more than 50 years. It's never about satisfaction as you suggested.

[Kuchana]

What a load of red horseshit.

We deserve the apology and Japan owe us one for more than 50 years. It's never about satisfaction as you suggested.

How will we know when that satisfaction is fulfilled?

[Tang]

How will we know when that satisfaction is fulfilled?


It is not about satisfaction, it's about dignity and justice!!

why is it so hard to understand for some? :confused:

[amietron]

not their style? so that's how first world governments work...
yeah. not their style. basically, in this situation, it's-- may bygones, bebygones.

[Kuchana]

It is not about satisfaction, it's about dignity and justice!!

why is it so hard to understand for some? :confused:

Excuse me but I do understand. I'm just asking. When will you know when you're at peace?

[amietron]

What a load of red horseshit.

We deserve the apology and Japan owe us one for more than 50 years. It's never about satisfaction as you suggested.
well, nobody ever said you didn't "deserve" one, or that it wasn't the right thing to do. just said that the likeliness of it coming anytime soon was not very high, in our opinions.

[Shogun Empress]

It is not about satisfaction, it's about dignity and justice!!

why is it so hard to understand for some? :confused:
I understand that many war criminals have been executed in the past and that there have been some Japanese politicians that have regretted the atrocious acts. Would an annual ceremony and monument built and financed by the Japanese goverment, along with an official apology by the Prime Minister satiate China and Korea? I doubt it. The only thing that Japan can really do about it is to just remember it and try our hardest not to repeat the mistakes we've made in the past. I'm sorry that your bitter and that your pride is hurt, but the only thing I can do is inform the children so that they will tell their children and warn them of the consequences of commiting atrocities upon fellow members of the human race. If you are still bitter about it and you really, really, really want to prevent a repeat of what happened many years ago, you should do something proactive like mentoring in schools to help prevent the next generation of asians from becoming a feast for crows and discards from the spoils of war.

[SunWuKong]

Yes, they have -- they've also done a lot of other things, such as reparations, banning Holocaust denial, identifying wartime criminals, and other things that Japan hasn't done. There's a lot of guilt in Germany over the Holocaust.

not to mention any slight activities of neo-nazism is taken with the utmost seriousness. i think some guy in Germany was punished for teaching his dog how to do a "seig hail".

[Shogun Empress]

i think some guy in Germany was punished for teaching his dog how to do a "seig hail".
Your kidding :confused:

[Tang]

When will you know when you're at peace?

Meaning??

[Kuchana]

Meaning??

Forgiving what was done in the past. Doesn't mean you need to forget of course.

[SunWuKong]

moving to rant...

[Tang]

just said that the likeliness of it coming anytime soon was not very high, in our opinions.

I think the world share that same view too.

Afterall, this issue is already more than 2 generations old, it is so damn old that no one would expect Japan to show remorse now or ever for what they did during the war.

It just shows what kind of country Japan is.

I understand that many war criminals have been executed in the past and that there have been some Japanese politicians that have regretted the atrocious acts. Would an annual ceremony and monument built and financed by the Japanese goverment, along with an official apology by the Prime Minister satiate China and Korea? I doubt it. The only thing that Japan can really do about it is to just remember it and try our hardest not to repeat the mistakes we've made in the past. I'm sorry that your bitter and that your pride is hurt, but the only thing I can do is inform the children so that they will tell their children and warn them of the consequences of commiting atrocities upon fellow members of the human race. If you are still bitter about it and you really, really, really want to prevent a repeat of what happened many years ago, you should do something proactive like mentoring in schools to help prevent the next generation of asians from becoming a feast for crows and discards from the spoils of war.


Firstly, it is not about satisfaction.

Secondly, before you try to remember (or forget) that "mistake" made by japan which killed many many many people in asia, or even before teaching your youth on this topic, make sure you have the right information in the school textbook and check their accuracies.

And thirdly, horseshit don't hurt my pride, and I don't feel bitter at all.

Forgiving what was done in the past. Doesn't mean you need to forget of course.

Have they been punished for their crimes? No.

Have they shown any remorse of what they did? No.

Then how and why should we forgive them?

It may be easy for some to say that forgiveness is the greatest virtue of the human race, but for the victims and their families, how do they forgive?

[Shogun Empress]

Have they been punished for their crimes? No.

Have they shown any remorse of what they did? No.

Who is 'they'? Are you referring to Japanese as a whole or just the people involved in the massacre (http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/mod/nanking.html)? Have they been punished for their crimes? Yes (http://www.cnd.org/njmassacre/nj.html#CRIMES).

SUMMARY OF THE VERDICT AND SENTENCE

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Counts

ACCUSED 1 27 29 31 32 33 35 36 54 55 SENTENCE NOTE
---------------------------------------------------------------
ARAKI G G X X X X X X X X Life Imp. Paroled 1955
DOIHARA G G G G G X G G G O Death
HASHIMOTO G G X X X X X Life Imp. Paroled 1945
HATA G G G G G X X X G Life Imp. Paroled 1955
HIRANUMA G G G G G X X G X X Life Imp. Paroled 1955
HIROTA G G X X X X X X G Death
HOSHINO G G G G G X X X X Life Imp. Paroled 1955
ITAGAKI G G G G G X X Death
KAYA G G G G G X G G G O Life Imp. Paroled 1955
KIDO G G G G G X X X X X Life Imp. Paroled 1955
KIMURA G G G G G G G Death KOISO G G G G G X X G Life Imp. Died 1950
MATSUI X X X X X X X X G Death
MINAMI G G X X X X X Life Imp. Paroled 1954
MUTO G G G G G X X G G Death OKA G G G G G X X Life Imp. Paroled 1954
OSHIMA G X X X X X X Life Imp.
Paroled 1955 SATO G G G G G X X Life Imp. Paroled 1956
SHIGEMITSU X G G G G G X X G 7 years Paroled 1950 Apointed Foreign
Minister 1954
SHIMADA G G G G G X X Life Imp. Paroled 1955
SHIRATORI G X X X X Life Imp. Died 1949
SUZUKI G G G G G X X X X Life Imp. Paroled 1955
TOGO G G G G G X X X 20 years Died 1948
TOJO G G G G G G X G O Death Enshrined as martr" at the Yasukuni Shrine in
1978
UMEZU G G G G G X X X Life Imp. Died 1949
Blank: No indictment; G: Guilty; X: Not Guilty; O: Other.


COUNTS OF INDICTMENT:

Count 1: as "leaders, organizers, instigators, or accomplices in
the formulation or execution of a common plan or conspiracy
... to wage wars of aggression, and war or wars in
violation of international law."
Count 27: waging unprovoked war against China.
Count 29: waging aggressive war against the United States.
Count 31: waging aggressive war against the British Commonwealth.
Count 32: waging aggressive war against the Netherlands.
Count 33: waging aggressive war against France (Indochina).
Count 35 & 36: waging aggressive war against the USSR.
Count 54: "ordered, authorized, and permitted" inhumane treatment of
Prisoners of War (POWs) and others.
Count 55: "deliberately and recklessly disregarded their duty" to
take adequate steps to prevent atrocities.



SUMMARY OF CONVICTED CLASS A WAR CRIMINALS
------------------------------------------

Seven (7) sentenced to death:

Doihara, General Kenji (1883-1948). Commander, Kwantung Army,
1938-40; Supreme War Council, 1940-43; army commander in
Singapore, 1944-45. Deeply involved in the army's drug
trafficking in Manchuria. Later ran brutal POW and internee
camps in Malaya, Sumatra, Java and Borneo. Convicted on counts
1, 27, 29, 31, 32, 35, 36, 54.

Hirota, Baron Koki (1878-1948). Ambassador to the Soviet Union,
1928-31; foreign minister, 1933-36; premier, 1936-37. Was
foreign minister during the Rape of Nanking and other atrocities
perpetrated by the army. As premier, he led his cabinet in
planning the invasions of Southeast Asia and the Pacific
islands, in addition to continuing the undeclared war against
China. Convicted on Counts 1, 27, 55.

Itagaki, General Seishiro (1885-1948). Chief of staff, Kwantung
Army, 1936-37; minister of war, 1938-39; chief, army general
staff, 1939; commander in Korea, 1941; Supreme War Council,
1943; commander in Singapore, 1945. Troops under his command in
China and elsewhere terrorized prisoners and civilians. Was
responsible for prison camps in Java, Sumatra, Malaya, Borneo
and elsewhere. Convicted on Counts 1, 27, 29, 31, 32, 35, 36,
54.

Kimura, General Heitaro (1888-1948). Chief of staff, Kwantung
Army, 1940-41; vice minister of war, 1941-43; Supreme War
Council, 1943; army commander in Burma, 1944-45. Helped plan
the China and Pacific wars, including surprise attacks.
Involved in the brutalization of the Allied POWs and was the
field commander in Burma when civilian and POW slave labor built
and died on the Siam-Burma Railway. Convicted on Counts 1, 27,
29, 31, 32, 54, 55.

Matsui, General Iwane (1878-1948). Personal appointee of the
emperor to the Geneva Disarmament Conference, 1932-37;
commander, China Expeditionary Force, 1937-38. Troops under his
overall command were responsible for the Rape of Nanking in 1937
and other atrocities. He retired in 1938 and then ceased to
play an active role in military affairs. Convicted on Count 55.
He was one of 14 Class A war criminals who were secretly
enshrined as "matyrs" at the Yasukuni Shrine, which is dedicated
to Japan's war dead and is Japan's most revered Shinto temple.

Muto, General Akira (1892-1948). Vice chief of staff, China
Expeditionary Force, 1937; director, military Affairs Bureau,
1939-42; army commander in Sumatra, 1942-43; army chief of staff
in the Philippines, 1944-45. Troops under his command
participated in both the Rape of Nanking and the Rape of Manila.
Convicted on Counts 1, 27, 29, 31, 32, 54, 55.

Tojo, General Hideki (1884-1948). Chief, Manchurian secret
police, 1935; councillor, Manchurian Affairs Bureau, 1936; chief
of staff, Kwantung Army, 1937-38; vice minister of war, 1938;
minister of war 1940-44; premier, 1941-44. Considered the
arch-criminal of the Pacific War. Tojo assumed full
responsibility for all the actions of his government and the
military during the war. Convicted on Counts 1, 27, 29, 31, 32,
33, 54.

Sixteen (16) sentenced to life imprisonment:

Araki, General Sadao (1877-1966). Minister of war, 1931-34;
Supreme War Council, 1934-36; minister of education 1938-39;
senior adviser to the cabinet, 1939-40. An early advocate of
Japanese military expansionism. While education minister, he
restructured the Japanese school system along military lines.
Convicted on Counts 1 and 27. Paroled in 1955.

Hashimoto, Colonel Kingoro (1890-1957). Held various commands,
including that of an artillery regiment during the Rape of
Nanking in 1937. Played a major role in staging the Mukden
Incident, which eventually led to war with China. Author of
political books of racist propaganda, he was important in
mobilizing Japanese public opinion behind the Pacific War.
Convicted on Counts 1 and 27. Paroled in 1954.

Hata, Field Marshal Shunroku (1879-1962). Supreme War Council,
1937; commander, China Expeditionary Force, 1938, 1941-44;
minister of war, 1939-40. One of the militarists who planned
the invasion of China in the 1930s. He was in overall command
of troops who perpetrated countless atrocities against Chinese
civilians. Convicted on Counts 1, 27, 29, 31, 32, 55. Paroled
in 1954.

Hiranuma, Baron Kiichiro (1867-1952). Privy Council, 1924-39;
founder and president, Kokuhonsha (right-wing patriotic
society), 1926-28; premier, 1938; minister of home affairs,
1940; minister without portfolio, 1940-41; president, Privy
Council, 1945. Convicted on crimes 1, 27, 29, 31, 32, 36.

Hoshino, Naoki (1892-1978). Chief of financial affairs,
Manchukuo (Manchuria), 1932-34; director of general affairs
(chief civilian officer), Manchukuo, 1936; minister without
portfolio, 1940-41; chief cabinet secretary, 1941-44. Convicted
on Counts 1, 27, 29, 312, 32. Paroled in 1955.

Kaya, Okinori (1889-1977). Minister of finance, 1937-38,
1941-44; president, North China Development Company, 1939-41.
An early advocate of selling narcotics to the Chinese to finance
the expenses of the occupation forces. Convicted on Counts 1,
27, 29, 31, 32. Paroled in 1955.

Kido, Marquis Koichi (1889-1977). Chief secretary to the lord
keeper of the privy seal, 1930-37; minister of education, 1937;
minister of welfare, 1938; minister of home affairs, 1939; lord
keeper of the privy seal 1940-45. Was Emperor Hirohito's
closest adviser during the most critical periods of the wars
with China and the Allies. His secret diary, which he kept
during all of his time at or near the seat of power, was the
prosecution's bible during much of the Tokyo trial. Convicted
on Counts 1, 27, 29, 31, 32. Paroled in 1955.

Koiso, General Kuniaki (1880-1950). Vice minister of war, 1932;
chief of staff, Kwantung Army, 1932-34; army commander in Korea,
1935-38; minister of overseas affairs, 1939; governor-general,
Korea, 1942-44; premier 1944-45. Was known among the Korean
population as "the Tiger of Korea" because of his brutality. As
premier, he was aware of POW death camps. Convicted on Counts
1, 27, 29, 31, 32, 55.

Minami, General Jiro (1874-1955). Minister of war, 1931;
Supreme War Council, 1931-34; commander, Kwantung Army, 1934-36;
governor-general, Korea, 1936-42; privy Council, 1942-45. An
early leader of the army clique that controlled Japan in the
1930s and 1940s. Ruled Japan's Korean colony with an iron fist.
Convicted on Counts 1 and 27. Paroled in 1945.

Oka, Admiral Takasumi (1890-1973). Chief, Naval Affairs Bureau,
1940-44; vice minister of the navy, 1944. An important
participant in planning the surprise attacks perpetrated by
Japanese naval forces during the second week in December 1941.
Also administered some POW and civilian to shoot survivors of
torpedoed Allied ships. Convicted on Counts 1, 27, 29, 31, 32.
Paroled in 1954.

Oshima, General Hiroshi (1886-1975). Military attache in
Germany, 1934-38; ambassador to Germany, 1938-39, 1941-45.
Helped forge the Axis Pact with Germany and Italy and was an
intimate of Hilter, Himmler, Goring, and Ribbentrop. Convicted
on Count 1. Paroled in 1955.

Sato, General Kenryo (1895-1975). Section head, then chief,
Military Affairs Bureau, 1942-44; assistant chief of staff,
China Expeditionary Force, 1944; army commander in Indochina,
1945. Convicted on Counts 1, 27, 29, 31, 32. Paroled in 1956.

Shimada, Admiral Shigetaro (1883-1976). Vice chief of naval
staff, 1935-37; commander, China Fleet, 1940; navy minister,
1941-44; Supreme War Council, 1944. Authorized the naval
surprise attacks in December 1941. Naval units under his
overall command massacred Allied POWs, transported prisoners and
civilian internees aboard hellships, and killed any surviving
crew members of torpedoed Allied ships. Convicted on Counts 1,
27, 29, 31, 32. Paroled in 1955.

Shiratori, Toshio (1887-1949). Director, Information Bureau,
Foreign Ministry, 1929-33; ambassador to Italy, 1938-40; adviser
tot the foreign minister, 1940. A supporter of military
expansionism, he favored an alliance among Germany, Italy the
Soviet Union and Japan to dominate the world. Convicted on
Count 1.

Suzuki, General Teiichi (1888- ). chief, China Affairs Bureau,
1938-41; president, Cabinet Planning Board, and minister without
portfolio, 1941-43; adviser to the cabinet, 1943-44. An early
and active supporter of militarism. Involved in Japan's drug
trafficking in China and approved the use of POWs and civilians
as slave laborers. Convicted on Counts 1, 27, 29, 31, 32.
Paroled in 1955.

Umezu, General Yoshijiro (1882-1949). Section chief, general
staff, 1931-34; commander, China Expeditionary Force, 1934; vice
minister of war, 1939-44; army chief of staff, 1944-45.
Convicted on Counts 1, 27, 29, 31, 32.

Two sentenced to lesser terms:

Shigemitsu, Mamoru (1887-1957). Ambassador to China, 1931-32;
vice minister of foreign affairs, 1933-36; ambassador to the
Soviet Union, 1936-38; ambassador to Great Britain, 1938-41;
foreign minister, 1943-45. He and General Umezu signed the
instrument of surrender in 1945. Convicted on Counts 27, 29,
31, 32, 33, 55. Sentenced to seven years in prison. Paroled in
1950, he reentered the political arena and was appointed foreign
minister in 1954.

Togo, General Hideki (1884-1948). Ambassador to Germany, 1937;
ambassador to the Soviet Union, 1938; foreign minister, 1941-42,
1945. Convicted on Counts 1, 27, 29, 31, 32. Sentenced to
twenty years in prison.

Try to be more specific the next time you are pointing fingers because categorizing every Japanese as a war criminal is the same as Nazi Germany calling Jews 'christ-killers'

[Shogun Empress]

girl, i understand what you're saying, but ask a lot of the people in japan right now about the koreans, chinese, and philipinos, and they either smirk, sneer, laugh, or look disgusted - and we aint even talkin about the older gen.


love,
prof. frink
:frown:

[kasia]

SUMMARY OF THE VERDICT AND SENTENCE

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Counts

ACCUSED 1 27 29 31 32 33 35 36 54 55 SENTENCE NOTE
---------------------------------------------------------------
ARAKI G G X X X X X X X X Life Imp. Paroled 1955
DOIHARA G G G G G X G G G O Death
HASHIMOTO G G X X X X X Life Imp. Paroled 1945
HATA G G G G G X X X G Life Imp. Paroled 1955
HIRANUMA G G G G G X X G X X Life Imp. Paroled 1955
HIROTA G G X X X X X X G Death
HOSHINO G G G G G X X X X Life Imp. Paroled 1955
ITAGAKI G G G G G X X Death
KAYA G G G G G X G G G O Life Imp. Paroled 1955
KIDO G G G G G X X X X X Life Imp. Paroled 1955
KIMURA G G G G G G G Death KOISO G G G G G X X G Life Imp. Died 1950
MATSUI X X X X X X X X G Death
MINAMI G G X X X X X Life Imp. Paroled 1954
MUTO G G G G G X X G G Death OKA G G G G G X X Life Imp. Paroled 1954
OSHIMA G X X X X X X Life Imp.
Paroled 1955 SATO G G G G G X X Life Imp. Paroled 1956
SHIGEMITSU X G G G G G X X G 7 years Paroled 1950 Apointed Foreign
Minister 1954
SHIMADA G G G G G X X Life Imp. Paroled 1955
SHIRATORI G X X X X Life Imp. Died 1949
SUZUKI G G G G G X X X X Life Imp. Paroled 1955
TOGO G G G G G X X X 20 years Died 1948
TOJO G G G G G G X G O Death Enshrined as martr" at the Yasukuni Shrine in
1978
UMEZU G G G G G X X X Life Imp. Died 1949
Blank: No indictment; G: Guilty; X: Not Guilty; O: Other.


WHAT? i didn't even know they served basically no time. paroled 1945. 1955. the longest was 1956. is that how japan defines life imprisonment? and check out the dude that was subsequently appointed foreign minister. 0-10 years in prison for sodomizing women and children with samurai swords. i'm appalled that you would even post that as evidence that japan sought to punish the individuals involved. it's embarassing and shameful and an indication of how you view the value of the lives lost during the massacre.

[rakovlam]

Here in America, we call it "Reality TV".

[Shogun Empress]

'i'm appalled that you would even post that as evidence that japan sought to punish the individuals involved.' I only posted it as evidence to show that something was actually done. I didn't mean to imply that the punishment given was justified. After taking a more in-depth look at the list, I think I can understand how you feel.

[amietron]

It just shows what kind of country Japan is.
what kind of country is japan?

[kuilong]

I only posted it as evidence to show that something was actually done. I didn't mean to imply that the punishment given was justified. After taking a more in-depth look at the list, I think I can understand how you feel.

We should also note that only 28 of the 80 Class A war criminals were brought to trial.

[bigwong235]

I only posted it as evidence to show that something was actually done. I didn't mean to imply that the punishment given was justified. After taking a more in-depth look at the list, I think I can understand how you feel.


but it kinda seems like a slap in the face. like the punishment given was just superficial, and that they didn't really mean it. it's almost worse than just doing nothing.

[Made in China]

I would be long Dead until the Japanese Government apologizes to those victims. Its been over 50 years!!!!

How much people have the Japanese killed?

Over 10 million civilian causalties in China alone.

[SunWuKong]

Over 10 million civilian causalties in China alone.

woh wait a minute. i don't think even the Chinese government puts the figure that high.

[Shinran]

I think the world share that same view too.

Afterall, this issue is already more than 2 generations old, it is so damn old that no one would expect Japan to show remorse now or ever for what they did during the war.

It just shows what kind of country Japan is.




Firstly, it is not about satisfaction.

Secondly, before you try to remember (or forget) that "mistake" made by japan which killed many many many people in asia, or even before teaching your youth on this topic, make sure you have the right information in the school textbook and check their accuracies.

And thirdly, horseshit don't hurt my pride, and I don't feel bitter at all.



Have they been punished for their crimes? No.

Have they shown any remorse of what they did? No.

Then how and why should we forgive them?

It may be easy for some to say that forgiveness is the greatest virtue of the human race, but for the victims and their families, how do they forgive?
Everyone could continue pound on the Japanese government during the war. We all know who did it, why they did it and how vile it was. YES. I UNDERSTAND. There may not be an apology forthcoming. But there might be. YOU NEVER KNOW.

If you want to continue this to one more level, let's consider how many Japanese civilians were killed during the firebombing of Japan, Tokyo and of course the two atomic weapons of mass destruction. I keep hearing different figures of how many people were really killed in the AMERICAN airstrikes against Japan. I hear 5 million total. I hear 15 million. Anything under 2 million is horseshit.

Has the US apologized for killing so many non-combatants? And for the usage of fire to destroy cities made mostly of wood, bamboo and paper? Did we accuse Stimson, McArthur and Mitchell of being war criminals?

I stand by my original statement some months back...HISTORY is written by the VICTORS.

But I digress

Yes, the Japanese government during the war was evil incarnate. The atrocities were beyond human imagination. The current government needs to apologize, granted the old farts are still in power are the same who had some hand in either the war or the reconstruction and have memories of the war.

Let's get one thing straight. JAs and almost all Japanese nationals are disgusted with what the Japanese government and the military did to the Chinese, Koreans and SEAs during the war. I can't think of anyone on the face of the earth who condones the actions of the Japanese government and military during the war.

With that said, let's move on to something completely different. Does anyone think that Peter Jennings is an evil leprechan?

[Shogun Empress]

but it kinda seems like a slap in the face. like the punishment given was just superficial, and that they didn't really mean it. it's almost worse than just doing nothing.I bet this is how the Muslims feel about the prison scandal. What was that soldiers punishment? Just a year and reduction in grade? I don't think most of America is shamed or even phased by this scandal.

[kasia]

Has the US apologized for killing so many non-combatants? And for the usage of fire to destroy cities made mostly of wood, bamboo and paper? Did we accuse Stimson, McArthur and Mitchell of being war criminals?


i thought the answer was yes?

[Shinran]

i thought the answer was yes?
Correct me if I'm wrong (love to see some proof), but the US has not put any of this in an apology.

And we've never held any of the military leadership, nevertheless the political leadership, accountable for the horrible atrocities of war WE'VE committed. If you think the Iraqi prisoner scandal is big, this would've shredded both the executive branch and the legislative branch to bits. Women, children, elderly wiped out in a deliberate attempt to demoralize and damage the Japanese infrastructure.

I'd like to see what the media would do with something this big.

[Kuchana]

I bet this is how the Muslims feel about the prison scandal. What was that soldiers punishment? Just a year and reduction in grade? I don't think most of America is shamed or even phased by this scandal.

of course they have a right to be angry but asking for the death sentence??? c'mon that's just a little too harsh there.

Whoa check this out.

http://csf.colorado.edu/bcas/otherart/shalom2.htm

Throughout the war, public opinion polls showed 10-13 percent of the American public consistently supporting the annihilation or extermination of the Japanese as a people.82 Paul V. McNutt, the head of the War Manpower Commission, gave public voice to this sentiment when he declared in April 1945 that he favored "extermination of the Japanese in toto" (though he later added that he was expressing his personal view).83 The atom bomb made such a preference possible.

U.S. officials knew that the Russians were going to be entering the war against Japan in early to mid-August and they anticipated that this would have a devastating effect on Japanese leaders, less for its military impact than because Soviet belligerence would close off Tokyo's one hope for a mediated settlement. U.S. intelligence reported that "the entry of the USSR into the war would ... convince most Japanese at once of the inevitability of defeat."89 Stalin will "be in the Jap War on August 15th," Truman recorded in his diary on July 17. "Fini Japs when that comes about."90 But the next day Truman learned that the test of the atom bomb was successful. "Believe Japs will fold up before Russia comes in," Truman wrote, certain that the atom bomb would force a surrender.91 Instead of relying on the Soviet declaration of war (or even asking Stalin to join in issuing the Potsdam declaration) to make the atom bombs unnecessary, Truman hoped that the bombs could end the war before Moscow gained too much influence in Asia. In another cruel irony, a top-secret U.S. study concluded in 1946 that it was the Soviet entry into the war, not either of the atom bombs, that was the decisive factor in obtaining the Japanese surrender.

In any event, Truman rejected the demonstration idea and ordered that the first bomb be dropped on Hiroshima. It has been suggested that to policy makers the bomb was just another weapon. But Truman didn't think so: "This is the greatest thing in history," he commented after Hiroshima was incinerated.100 And Canadian Prime Minister Mackenzie King expressed his relief that the bomb had been dropped on Asiatic people, not on "white races" in Europe.

In the Atlantic Charter of August 1941, FDR and Churchill proclaimed a set of basic principles for a better world. First was "no aggrandizement, territorial or other." Second was "no territorial changes that do not accord with the freely expressed wishes of the peoples concerned."109 But U.S. officials were determined to take over all the Pacific island territories of Japan for the exclusive military use of the United States. The principle of self-determination, the New York Herald Tribune declared, was irrelevant where "the security of the United States and the stability of the Pacific world" were at stake."110 Britain's Colonial Secretary protested that the United States was trying to "get away with" the acquisition of Pacific island territories while employing "a rather diaphanous cover of the usual idealism."111 And the British Foreign Secretary complained to Secretary of State James Byrnes that the Soviet Union wanted a huge land mass, the United States had its "Monroe sphere on the American continent and were extending it into the Pacific." What would that leave the Europeans? Byrnes insisted that Washington did not seek empire in the Pacific, only scattered bases and islands with few inhabitants.112 And thus some 60,000 Pacific islanders became part of an extensive network of U.S. military bases, where their rights and well-being became hostage to the Pentagon's military priorities and nuclear weapons testing.

Americans express great frustration with Japanese politicians who can't seem to fully apologize for their country's wartime atrocities. But the Japanese left has always been eager to expose the record of Japan's aggression in Asia.149 Opposition to acknowledging the truth has come from the country's dominant conservative politicians who were allowed to maintain their grip on power by the U.S. Occupation authorities and who have been secretly bankrolled by the CIA.150 While the Occupation was tolerant toward war criminals and the conservatives more generally, MacArthur banned a threatened general strike in 1947, and over the next three years imposed laws severely weakening the labor movement.151 In 1949, there was a mass purge of Communists, using regulations originally designed for ultra-right militarists.

[Tang]

Everyone could continue pound on the Japanese government during the war. We all know who did it, why they did it and how vile it was. YES. I UNDERSTAND. There may not be an apology forthcoming. But there might be. YOU NEVER KNOW.

If you want to continue this to one more level, let's consider how many Japanese civilians were killed during the firebombing of Japan, Tokyo and of course the two atomic weapons of mass destruction. I keep hearing different figures of how many people were really killed in the AMERICAN airstrikes against Japan. I hear 5 million total. I hear 15 million. Anything under 2 million is horseshit.

Has the US apologized for killing so many non-combatants? And for the usage of fire to destroy cities made mostly of wood, bamboo and paper? Did we accuse Stimson, McArthur and Mitchell of being war criminals?

I stand by my original statement some months back...HISTORY is written by the VICTORS.

But I digress

Yes, the Japanese government during the war was evil incarnate. The atrocities were beyond human imagination. The current government needs to apologize, granted the old farts are still in power are the same who had some hand in either the war or the reconstruction and have memories of the war.

Let's get one thing straight. JAs and almost all Japanese nationals are disgusted with what the Japanese government and the military did to the Chinese, Koreans and SEAs during the war. I can't think of anyone on the face of the earth who condones the actions of the Japanese government and military during the war.

With that said, let's move on to something completely different. Does anyone think that Peter Jennings is an evil leprechan?


A country which thinks she has a superior "pure breed" (as someone proclaimed here) and would show no remorse for their past sins will always be dangerous to the world.

And to be honest, an apology that is overdue for over 50 years doesn't change the way I see Japan. However, my generation doesn't share the same kind of fear or animosity like our elderly have against Japan and the Japanese. We understand her importance and the economic and technological benefits she brings to China.

Until we have modernized our country and become a real industrial power, we will continue to be pragmatic, and suppressing our hatred and anger against a remorseless neighbour. But when we are king, she could be the first against the wall - whether she apologized or not.

The killings of innocent Japanese civilians by the A-bombs and other airstrikes were indeed sad, but did you know it would take two A-bombs for a complete surrender from Japan, and to close that final chapter of the second World War? So from another perspective, the Japanese government was also responsible for those civilian deaths.

Without those two bombs, it is certain that there would be more civilian deaths elsewhere, particularly in China. Of course, the Japanese would never admit that, they only care about the deaths of their own civilians.

[applehead]

A country which thinks she has a superior "pure breed" (as someone proclaimed here) and would show no remorse for their past sins will always be dangerous to the world.

And to be honest, an apology that is overdue for over 50 years doesn't change the way I see Japan. However, my generation doesn't share the same kind of fear or animosity like our elderly have against Japan and the Japanese. We understand her importance and the economic and technological benefits she brings to China.

Until we have modernized our country and become a real industrial power, we will continue to be pragmatic, and suppressing our hatred and anger against a remorseless neighbour. But when we are king, she could be the first against the wall - whether she apologized or not.

The killings of innocent Japanese civilians by the A-bombs and other airstrikes were indeed sad, but did you know it would take two A-bombs for a complete surrender from Japan, and to close that final chapter of the second World War? So from another perspective, the Japanese government was also responsible for those civilian deaths.

Without those two bombs, it is certain that there would be more civilian deaths elsewhere, particularly in China. Of course, the Japanese would never admit that, they only care about the deaths of their own civilians.

oh goodness. i take it you harbor animosity towards the japanese government?
hmmm... :smile:
does anyone honestly consider japan a danger to the world?
you know it would be nice to get apologies.
but it hasn't happened and from the looks of things
it might never happen.
but we know they're assholes for what they did, they know themselves
that they're assholes for what they did and everyone knows they're
assholes for what they did and that's good enough for me.
and maybe me saying this is kind of spitting on the graves
of those who suffered in the hands of the japanese government
but god, i feel like all this negative energy can be used
for something else.
honestly, who in the United States really care about Japan.
who sees them as a threat or anything besides a country
that exports nice electronic equipment, cars and the country
that bore the woman that broke up the beatles.

[Shogun Empress]

A country which thinks she has a superior "pure breed" (as someone proclaimed here) and would show no remorse for their past sins will always be dangerous to the world.Oh yeah like we're really frightening people with Pokemon.

[Tang]

oh goodness. i take it you harbor animosity towards the japanese government?
hmmm... :smile:
does anyone honestly consider japan a danger to the world?
you know it would be nice to get apologies.
but it hasn't happened and from the looks of things
it might never happen.
but we know they're assholes for what they did, they know themselves
that they're assholes for what they did and everyone knows they're
assholes for what they did and that's good enough for me.
and maybe me saying this is kind of spitting on the graves
of those who suffered in the hands of the japanese government
but god, i feel like all this negative energy can be used
for something else.
honestly, who in the United States really care about Japan.
who sees them as a threat or anything besides a country
that exports nice electronic equipment, cars and the country
that bore the woman that broke up the beatles.



C'mon, I'm sure you know what I really mean.

I mean, it would be inconceivable if Germany ever refused to apologize to the Jews and to most Europeans. Had the Germans not apologized or instead gave the world some regretable donkeyshits, like the japanese did, do you think the world can still have confidence in Germany and not see her as a dangerous country?

The Japanese got away only because the U.S. were behind their backs.

Of course, Japan is not a threat to the States because she is your most important ally in East Asia, and you are like a million miles away from Asia. You even gave permissions to them to send troops to Iraq, so obviously she is not a threat, but a close friend to you americans.

I am only saying Japan is dangerous because of her attitudes towards history and on invading other countries. Remember a japanese on this forum saying that "HISTORY IS WRITTEN BY VICTORS"? This is exactly their attitudes. They think Japan got all these condemnations and blames only because they were the loser of the war, and not because of their horrible "mistakes" in Asia.

Had they been the victor of the war, most Asians would be enslaved and not even live the day to see those donkeyshit comments.

I ain't being sentimental here, or wasting my valuable energy. In fact, I even suggest you refrain from calling them assholes. I mean, we are all mature adults who should be capable of holding a discussion, and without making unnessary and offensive remarks.


PS: An apology from japan is never about feeling nice.

[kitty]

"HISTORY IS WRITTEN BY VICTORS"

That's not necessarily what the Japanese culture thinks. That's a true and objective observation of history. Do you think shit went down in America exactly the way we are taught, or do you think maybe events are tainted by the fact that it's America who's doing the teaching and learning and not, say, someone else.

My mother tells me stories of how, in China, she was taught a very different history of Asian than what she was taught in Taiwan (she was a student in both), and both are very different from the history that American students are taught of Asia.

The rest of your comments, while I understand your anger towards the japanese, seem a little one-sided. I mean, how can you really say what a Japan-occupied Asia would've been like? They aren't alone in the commitment of war crimes and wartime brutality. Japan isn't alone in changing history to suit their own means. China, too, is guilty of this, as is every other country.

[applehead]

C'mon, I'm sure you know what I really mean.


i know what you mean.
i know how you feel.
but you're preaching to the converted.
and right now, you're just sounding like a broken record.
and you're REALLY not giving the japanese enough credit.

They think Japan got all these condemnations and blames only because they were the loser of the war, and not because of their horrible "mistakes" in Asia.
that above comment is just ignorant.