Forum - View topicNEWS: Politically-charged Manga Suspended in Japan
|
Goto page Previous Next Note: this is the discussion thread for this article |
| Author | Message | |||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
abunai
Old Regular
 Posts: 5463 Location: 露命 |
|
|||||||||||||||
This is an exceedingly naïve view of how a national government works in the modern era. True, the Meiji Restoration was billed as a "restoration of power to the Emperor" - but the reality was different. During the early Tokugawa shogunate, the role of the Emperor had been entirely that of figurehead ruler. Later, the Shogun himself became a figurehead ruler, and the true power was vested in the officials of the bakufu, the military/bureaucratic junta. With the Meiji Restoration, power was nominally handed over to the Emperor. However, the effect of the Restoration was to remove the bakufu's power and pass it to other hands - not to the Emperor. Although the Emperor, in the new system, had considerably greater influence than previously, the reality of power was that others were pulling the strings. As Japan opened, the influence of the military grew, and the events of the Asian-Pacific part of WW2 became gradually inevitable. This is not to exonerate the Showa Emperor, for there is no doubt that he approved of the initial Japanese war of invasion in Manchuria and probably even of the decision to undertake a war with the Allies. Even so, it is entirely false to say that he had the power to stop events. He didn't try, it is true, but if he had, it would have made little difference - and it would probably have cost him a great deal.
You've touched on a cultural issue. It is not an easy thing for Japanese to admit to error - to do so is to lose face. Not is it customary to press others for an apology, because it is also deeply embarrassing to cause embarrassment to others. Therefore, situations where someone is clearly at fault are carefully glossed over by everybody. It is highly unusual for someone to press another person for an apology. Accordingly, the Japanese experience a great deal of difficulty with the Western custom of public apologies for past crimes. Not only are they embarrassed to be asked to apologise - they are also embarrassed to be causing embarrassment by having created a situation where such pressure is necessary. As a result, most Japanese government "apologies" to date have been exceedingly vague and unspecific by Western standards. It's a cultural difference that isn't easily overcome - but don't mistake this for a general Japanese unwillingness to accept the reality that grave mistakes were made. It's just not talked about. Of course, this brings about problems with regard to the younger generation, who are sometimes not fully educated about the situation - and with those members of the older generations who remain unwilling to accept that anything untoward happened.
This is true as a general principle of public debate. There's a lot of bigotry floating around in the world, and any public debate tends to bring it to light. However, the fact that a great deal of ignorant and ill-conceived bigotry exists does not ameliorate the need for informaed and serious critical discussion. There can be no doubt that Japan has a number of historical problems that have gone unresolved. Personally, I believe that, whether resolved or not, such issues tend to become unimportant as time passes. As an historian, I see absolutely no need for modern Americans to make apologies for slavery, or for the native American genocide, both of which ended many generations ago. Nor do I consider it necessary for contemporary Germans to apologise for the Holocaust, or Turkey to apologise for the Kurdish genocide... I could go on. There is no doubt that Japan acted at times despicably during the first half of the 20th century. But we cannot seriously expect the present generation to accept blame for that.
Hmm, I hesitate to open this can of worms again - but the most vocal Holocaust-deniers are actually Americans. In fact, there is a lamentable tendency for the United States to import the most extreme world-views, cultivate and refine them in the American morass of bigotry and ethnic divisiveness (the euphemistically-styled "melting-pot"), and then re-export them. Whether it be one kind of extremist (such as Rabbi Meir Kahana) or another (such as Ernst Zündel) is immaterial - the process is the same.
Is that the impression you gained from that film? Have you actually seen it? To clear up a couple of misconceptions, the "blame it all on Hitler" excuse is one used mostly by older Germans, not the young ones. The youth have an attitude to WW2 that resembles that evidenced by the two young Japanese quoted in the last paragraph of the article you referred to - namely, that it was a long time ago, and they don't think much about the causes. While I agree that this is a somewhat problematic attitude, it is a far cry from denying collective responsibility. Further, I stand by remarks earlier in this post, that collective responsibility does not apply to later generations. I simply do not accept the Old Testament idea of visiting the sins of the fathers upon their children. That most young people are ignorant of history, and largely uninterested in it, is hardly any surprise. Anyone who has taught history (as I have) will know that youth is a time when history seems terribly irrelevant. I don't condone this, but it doesn't surprise me.
That figure is the official death toll given by the Chinese at the Tokyo Tribunal of War Criminals after the war. It is, of course, likely to have been somewhat inflated. The tribunal estimated the death toll variously at "over 100,000" or "over 200,000" during the first six weeks of the occupation. These figures were based chiefly on burial records. Later debate, in the 1970s, featured criticism of the Chinese evidence as anecdotal and the reliability of the burial records. Ultra-nationalists maintain that those killed numbered less than 10,000, and were mostly combatants, hence legitimate targets. The Japanese left wing traditionally accepts a figure of between 250,000 and 300,000. Personally, I don't really see the difference between 100,000 and 300,000 victims - and similarly, I don't see the debate on the actual number of Holocaust deaths to be useful. What matters is the enormity of the act - the fact that violent abuse and wholesale murder of civilians occurred, regardless of numbers, is what is important. And there is no denying that. - abunai |
||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||
Mohawk52
 Posts: 8202 Location: England, UK |
|
|||||||||||||||
|
If one thing is universally true, it is the fact that history is the perspective of one's point of view, whether individually, or collectively, of things said and done. All of what is, or has been, recorded by cultures and civilizations is 3/4 fact, 1/4 unproven speculation. It all depends on who a person is which determines which part that falls under. There is another truth that is universal and doesn't ever look like changing, that is; war is the most despicable act ever invented and only our species has invested so much to its proliferation. Will we ever learn?
|
||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||
|
GATSU
Posts: 15298 |
|
|||||||||||||||
|
abunai:
Even if the descendants of slaves live in ghettoes, because they didn't have the financial resources or connections of their rich white counterparts to get ahead? And even though we continue to show our contempt for Native Americans by breaking our treaties with them and dumping all kinds of wastes(including nuclear) on their reservations?
What about German corporations like the ones which own Del Rey which profited off of Jewish slavery, and only recently were forced to pay reparations? What about Swiss Banks which only recently were forced to pay back the money they stole from Jews?
I'm sure Kurds-and Armenians-would disagree, especially since Turkey only barely acknowledged any genocide, because they were pressured by the EU to reform their policies in order to be considered for membership. But hey, while we're at it, let's pardon Millosovec, because he's had time to reform. And let's pretend that American and British soldiers didn't just torture Iraqi prisoners a few months ago. It's all going to be yesterday's news anyway, so why bother focusing on it?
Actually, Japanese courts of law have accepted blame for the some of the atrocities against the Chinese. ( Try http://www.inq7.net/wnw/2004/mar/27/wnw_4-1.htm and http://english.people.com.cn/200309/30/eng20030930_125218.shtml for starters.)
No, but it's competing for a Best Foreign Film Oscar, so it'll be seen sooner or later. As for my impression, based on the description of certain scenes, it sounds like a politically correct re-interpretation of Hitler as a "normal" but "misguided" guy. To tell the truth, I also didn't like one of the essays for Tezuka's Adolf which implied that Tezuka was trying to make him three-dimensional. I personally feel Tezuka was just trying to make him look even more like a lunatic by emphasizing Hitler's tendency to justify every action. |
||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||
|
abunai
Old Regular
Posts: 5463 Location: 露命 |
|
|||||||||||||||
In the heat of the moment (I seem to have pushed all your buttons), you are confusing present or recent crimes with those committed by other people in another generation. One person committed a crime, yet you are expecting another person, who may not even be the descendant of the criminal, to atone for that crime. Mixing the profits of corporations (which are legal entities, technically "persons" who never die) into the argument, is muddying the water. It sidesteps the issue of personal responsibility. Here's the thing: I am absolutely certain that one of my ancestors was responsible, indirectly, for the death of a king of Denmark in the early 19th century. I am also equally certain that another one of my ancestors was a terrible criminal. Am I morally obligated to apologise to their victims' descendants? If the answer is yes (I don't think it is, but let's say so for argument's sake), am I equally obligated, if these criminals weren't direct ancestors, but remote uncles? What if it was just my neighbour's great-grandfather? Am I morally responsible for his actions a century or more ago? Present-day oppression of minorities (as in the case you cited with the native Americans) is a present-day crime. It falls upon the head of those committing it. But what their grandfathers did, is not their responsibility. They weren't even born. Consider the massive weight of all the atrocious crimes that have been committed by humans towards each other, since time immemorial - since we are all remotely related to each other, who atones? Do we go back to Ugh the Caveman who bashed Gurk's head with a rock, and say "I'm sorry" for that? (in this argument, feel free to substitute Cain and Abel for Ugh and Gurk, if you are Christian fundamentalist - and disregard if you are Catholic, since I understand that that issue is resolved by dogma)
Again, you are mixing the legal responsibility incurred by corporations (as legal, undying "persons") with moral responsibility passed on from generation to generation. In the cases you refer to, what happened was that the "person" (the corporation) who committed, and profited from, the crime was forced to pay reparations to victims. It's no different from any other crime, in that regard. Let's put it a different way. Assuming you approve of the death penalty (I don't, under any circumstances, but never mind that), would you approve if the death penalty incurred by a murderer be meted out to his grandchild, instead - since he was long dead and couldn't pay the price himself?
How brave of you, to use a film you haven't seen, to support your argument. Oh, wait, disregard that - it's actually rather common on this forum. 
-abunai |
||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||
enjin2000
 Posts: 1484 Location: Japan |
|
|||||||||||||||
Learn before accuse. |
||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||
|
abunai
Old Regular
Posts: 5463 Location: 露命 |
|
|||||||||||||||
I repeat: There is no doubt that Japan acted at times despicably during the first half of the 20th century. Not an accusation - a statement of fact. Although details are still being debated (such as casualty figures), the Rape of Nanking, like the Holocaust, is an indisputable, historically verifiable fact. What is at issue is not the facts of what happened, but whether there is a moral responsibility for the events that can be passed on to the following generations. But the fact remains that the Rape of Nanking occurred, and that the nation of Japan committed a terrible crime. If you deny that, then you become morally responsible for that denial. - abunai |
||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||
|
Mohawk52
Posts: 8202 Location: England, UK |
|
|||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||
|
abunai
Old Regular
Posts: 5463 Location: 露命 |
|
|||||||||||||||
"Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it" - George Santayana, The Life of Reason (1905). That particular quotation, I might add, is to be found (in paraphrase) on the wall of the museum at Dachau. - abunai |
||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||
|
Zac
ANN Executive Editor
 Posts: 7912 Location: Anime News Network Technodrome |
|
|||||||||||||||
|
Wow. Abunai, you are really, really educated. I agree with everything you said. It is incredibly refreshing to hear someone of your intellect on this forum.
That having been said I find several things to be eye-opening about the responses to your points. One is enjin2000, who is Japanese, ignoring the entirety of your post and telling you to 'learn before accuse'. If he means 'learn revisionist history via the Japanese educational system and then parrot back to me what the government wants me to think', which I believe he does, then he basically proves what we all know about this. The institutionalization of revisionist history is an absolutely frightening concept and now it's clear that this is what we have in Japan. To the person who said that "people who criticise Japan generally don't know a lot about the Japanese", that is a fairly sickening statement. Pointing out that the Rape of Nanking happened (which it did) is not a criticism, it's a fact. Pointing out that they were responsible for numerous atrocities in the 20th century is also not a criticism, it's a fact. Anyway, thank you Abunai for your amazing and enlightening comments. |
||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||
Rebecca
 Posts: 57 |
|
|||||||||||||||
|
http://www.columbia.edu/cu/ccba/cear/issues/fall99/text-only/yoshida.htm
Just an interesting little link for anyone interested. As for a few of the many topics brought up, I thought I'd point out that I've read a short (semi-fictional) story about a Japanese man trying to live his life normally even though he was a part of the Nankin(g)(jing) incident. Unfortunately I cannot find the story to offer a title or author, so you'll just have to trust me in knowing that there IS literature about it and the consequences of committing such an act. I should also point out (as I believe a few others have) that history classes ARE quite bias in the US. It's been mentioned that the history classes pre-college level never (or rarely) mention Asia's part in WWII. I took US/World history in elementary, jr., high, and college...and I can PROMISE you that it isn't just asia that they've left out of the loop. Anything as generic as US/World/any country history is going to leave a lot of the rougher stuff out and focus instead on the topics that are easier and quicker to teach. It isn't until you really start focusing on a certain area during a certain time period (generally in college) that you learn about the hot topics. |
||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||
|
07241988
Posts: 19 |
|
|||||||||||||||
|
Japan is a nation in denial. Not unlike Republicans who
still are looking for weapons of mass destruction , most Japanese still have trouoble seeing what they did wrong during that horrific war. It is upsetting to see that even after all this time , that Japan still covers over its sins. Maybe they need a Michael Moore. I bet they would love a George Bush version of the events of WW2. Why,
|
||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||
|
cookie
Former ANN Editor in Chief
 Posts: 2460 Location: Do not contact me for support. |
|
|||||||||||||||
This is a thread on a Japanese manga, which may have mis-represented events in China in and around 1937. As evidenced by countless other wars, ANY time an army occupies foreign soil, atrocities happen. The degree to which they occur, however, is up for debate. It's not about the plight of descendants from slaves, or Native Americans. Nor is it about Turkey or Kurds or whatever else. Stay on topic, please. For those who don't know what's being talked about, consider reading this article by a professor of mine. It contains links to both viewpoints (in English and Japanese). One thing that needs to be made clear is the notion of "nationalism" and how we apply labels; we call "Japan" a nation, comprised of "Japanese" people, but even if we falsely assume Japan is an ethnically homogeneous nation, that means NOTHING with regard to any individual's thoughts or feelings about events. I'd have to dig through my books to find specific names and organizations, but individuals and groups DID protest the government throughout the 1920s and 1930s. The individuals were, perhaps, not as famous as Yukichi or Soho of the 19th century, but they did exist. Should they be held "responsible" for their government's actions, because they didn't protest loudly enough to convince the government to stop what it was doing? Should their children be held responsible for their inability to sway history? The big questions are: Did the Japanese government know about the atrocities? Did they permit them or encourage them? How many people were killed/raped/tortured? Who was responsible and accountable for the actions? What sort of reparation was offered to the survivors and the descendents of those who were involved? |
||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||
|
abunai
Old Regular
Posts: 5463 Location: 露命 |
|
|||||||||||||||
I quite agree. When you "cry havoc, and let slip the dogs of war", atrocities tend to happen more or less automatically - and this is true, no matter how "civilised" the participating nations are. War strips away any veneer of civilisation, leaving behind something that most of us would prefer not to recognise as human.
That's a really good, balanced overview. The other article referenced earlier is good, too.
Nationalism, in many ways, is a clumsy concept, suited only to European circumstances - and then only to a specific period in European history. The state of affairs prevalent in most states of today is far too muddy to be genuinely nationalistic. Japan is no different. Like China or India, Japan only seems more or less homogenous when viewed from a distance by someone who has only a superficial acquaintance with it.
Excellent point. Similarly, Hitler was from unopposed. I'd point to a recent and seminal book by Karl Christian Lammers, a specialist in modern German history at the University of Copenhagen, Hitlers Modstandere - Det andet Tyskland 1933-1945 ("Hitler's Opponents - the second Germany 1933-1945", published in Denmark by Schønberg 1996), but I'm afraid it's in Danish, which wouldn't be very useful in the present discussion. Regardless, Lammers details a number of previously poorly documented events involving conscientious objection to Hitler's regime. Bringing it back on topic, my postulate is that any regime, however oppressive and monolithic, will have its share of opponents from within its own ranks. As a result, it will almost always be impossible to apportion all of the blame collectively, because some will have actively opposed the process.
These are excellent questions. I would suggest an additional question, however: has the time for such remedies passed? - abunai |
||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||
Yoshball
 Posts: 99 Location: Portland, OR |
|
|||||||||||||||
|
What needs to occur for the Japanese government and education system not to be revisionist is to do what Germany and France have done. Because of the history of great anomosity between the two countries existed for decades even before WWII, both France and Germany have exchanged textbooks soon after WWII ended. French historians check the accuracy of German textbooks and German historians check the accuracy of French textbooks. In this way, niether country can deny its wrong doing in WWII and other past events so the two countries will not build up tensions over past events again.
I wonder, however, if the Japanese government would allow the Korean or Chinese governments to check their textbooks and vise versa. The relationships have changed a bit, but there is still great anomosity between the countries and I'm not sure if this same solution, though effective, could be started in the current climate. |
||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||
|
mlund
Posts: 60 |
|
|||||||||||||||
I can't say I have a lot of respect for unsupported pot-shots at anyone's country as sound-bites. Thanks for stepping on that. At any rate, Abunai is completely on track. At this point, the issue is a mix of concerns for culture, individual identity, and history.
The fact that horrible things can happen during war should never be covered up. Sometimes openly declared war is a better alternative to tolerating a false "peace," despite the risk the horrible things can occur, and we shouldn't play "make believe" in regards to that reality either. Since we already have Nazis on the table, I'd judge that accepting Hitler's idea of "peace" in the world as a far worse alternative than the open warfare it took to stop him. What happened in Nanking happened, and it was a grievous wrong. Trying to erase that fact from memory is another wrong. However, based upon the culture you live in, talking about wrongs in certain times and places may be considered rude or hurtful - regardless of the factual nature of your information. It is wrong to let such a thing be forgotten, but it is also wrong to demand public self-flagelation over the issue for the next 20 generations. A proper balance must be struck. Also, trying to blame an entire race, ethnicity, or nationality for something that a past government did is juvenile - especially when that entire system from government to generations of citizens has been completely reconstructed since then. Nevermind the times when governments are often not acting faithfully as representatives of the governed.
All too true, though in fairness, there are plenty of people who speak from their lower orifices in judgment over such things - the "me too!" cause-heads and pseudo-intellectuals who have read half of a single editorial on the issue. To dismiss everyone who disagrees with you is one of their number, however, is quite irresponsible.
There is also the fact during the rise of the Nazi party in Germany, the Reichstag was thrown into turmoil through assassination, blackmail, deception, extortion, and voter fraud by communists and Nazis primarily. Hilter's rise to power had much to do with his efforts to subvert and destroy the other parties (such as the Catholic Center Party and the Social Democrats) and social institutions (chasing out or murdering troublesome clergy members, philosophers, journalists and teachers), thereby depriving German citizens from their rightful representation in government and their freedom of expression. Getting back to the point of the Manga, however, I don't believe that it is right to look down on someone for remembering something like the Rape of Nanking through literature. I do however, think it is a valid concern when people start using unverified evidence as source material. How much of the protesting is about mentioning Nanking, and how much of it is about submitting unverified evidence as truth? I don't know the people involved directly. I can't speak to how each one would think and feel. So, instead, I'd be more comfortable addressing the two factors distinctly. - Marty Lund |
||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||
 |
All times are GMT - 5 Hours |
|
|
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group