(by guest blogger, Andy Jackson)
The past permeates us. It gives us our assumptions, our frames of reference and all the rest of our mental shortcuts that make it possible to get through the day without having to analyze everything and every moment as if it were something new. Most of what we know is a gift from the past.
The problem is that the past is not standing right next to us that we can see and feel it directly. It has to be remembered, researched and recorded. For people, a good memory is often all we need but nations require a priesthood of historians to sift through often arcane documents and objects to interpret their meaning.
In northeast Asia the recent past is the has become fodder for demagogues across the region. That has led Deputy Secretary of State Robert Zoellick to propose a historians’ dialog to examine the history of the region:
"… What I have tried to suggest is that one way to defuse some of the tension on both sides is to have what is called in diplomatic parlance a ‘track two’ effort," Zoellick said, "perhaps have historians of China and Japan, perhaps the United States, too, examine the historic situation in World War II and perhaps other periods as well."
Would such an idea work? I doubt it.
The work of historians must also make it through the filter of our collective need to be see ourselves as in the right. That is why southerners in the United States can minimize the importance of slavery in the Civil War and northerners, looking at the same data, can pretend that the war was only about slavery.
In northeast Asia, the need of Japanese, Koreans and Chinese to see themselves as victims makes it especially difficult to resolved their differences over history between 1895 and 1945 and what that period means for them today. A victim deserves (or at least wants) our sympathy. A victim is not responsible for what happened to him. A victim demands understanding without criticism as he lashes out against his aggressor.
The Japanese see themselves as the first victims of some kind of generic militarism that took control of the country during that period, which culminated in their being attacked with two atomic bombs. The Chinese boast of their suffering during a brutal war in which Japan tried to become what China is; a multi-ethnic empire with a mono-ethnic core.
Naturally, I have more sympathy for Koreans than the other two, but the amount of self-righteousness and demagoguery that Korean politicians and civic groups use while actively seeking victim status makes it difficult for Koreans to honestly examine their past. The recent moves to ‘expose’ an arbitrarily selected group of pro-Japanese collaborators bodes ill:
The scope and the sheer numbers of those involved might prompt South Korea to take another, more balanced and objective look at its recent history and its place in the region. This would be a vitally important step forward for a nation that has declared its intention to pursue an independent path of foreign policy and diplomacy.
A more comprehensive and realistic public recognition of Korea’s history with Japan, for example, would allow Seoul to formulate policy and strategies based on less nationalistically charged interpretations of history. It would be a crucial first step in South Korea’s maturation into a developed democratic nation and a positive lesson for its regional neighbors, especially Japan, that have yet to come to terms with their own recent histories. Incomplete and distorted understandings of history by all parties fuel contemporary conflicts, such as the Korea-Japan disputes over Tokdo Island and the naming of the East Sea/Sea of Japan - among others.
But given the timing of the complicity-exposure project and the politically charged atmosphere of the nation… it is very possible that the long-overdue historical reassessment may become nothing more than a political weapon. This could be wielded to undermine and discredit political foes, as the names of families sympathetic to the Japanese are leaked to the press prior to official publication of The Dictionary of Pro-Japanese Koreans, slated for 2006.
Zoellick has his work cut out for him on this one.
Sphere: Related Content
32 Comments
Wow, another Andy Jackson post. Looks like the Marmot’s Hole is quickly turning into the Flying Marmot… er, the Yangban’s Hole. Damn! Nothing works like “Ahssa Hole.”
Seriously, though, good post. I look forward to fisking it when all my real-world problems are finally in the can. Can-in-ized, as we like to say here at [company name omitted].
Anyway, while it’s true we should never forget the past, God help us if we always remember it.
I don’t see why it’s not possible for everyone to be a victim of the Japanese Empire, including the Japanese themselves. For example in Okinawa, in the most brutally US/Japanese fighting when civilians where hiding in caves, the Japanese military would force them out so they could hide in the caves. If they didn’t come out, they would throw a grenade in and then go in. Any survivors would be turned into suicide bombers against the threat of being executed right in-front of their families.
I think a major reason relations are good in Europe and bad in Asia is because in Europe, no one says Germany is horrible, but says Hitler and the Nazi’s are. But in Asia everyone just says JAPAN. Everyone was a victim of a common evil during WW2, corrupt dictatorships. In Europe people have realized that, but in Asia almost everyone still lives under a corrupt dictatorship where it’s easier to say Japan as a whole is wrong rather then to look at the root of the issue.
The people of Korea China Japan, and all of Asia should all come together and be as one against corrupt dictatorships, they should have had their ties strengthened as a result of WW2. However as long as China is a corrupt dictatorship and insists that Japan as a whole is wrong, ignoring that the average starving Japanese citizen knew nothing of what was going over seas, it’s going to be difficult. Japan of 60 years ago is modern day North Korea. No one says the North Korean people are bad, just their corrupt leaders.
Today if someone says Germans are bad people because of WW2, that person is called a racist. Yet if someone says Japanese are bad people because of WW2, that person is a national hero. That’s wrong.
For example in Okinawa, in the most brutally US/Japanese fighting when civilians where hiding in caves, the Japanese military would force them out so they could hide in the caves. If they didn’t come out, they would throw a grenade in and then go in. Any survivors would be turned into suicide bombers against the threat of being executed right in-front of their families.
I think that would be an example of the Okinawans being victims, not the Japanese.
Kushibo, what about the starving civilians on the mainland? There was no fighting on the mainland so perhaps no one was killed by the Japanese military, but all their food was stolen and given to the army, all their possessions where stolen and given to the army, all their metal works where stolen and melted down to make munitions, women and children where enslaved in factories…
They’re not victims too?
And if you really want to get into the “do Okinawans count as Japanese” argument, you’re welcome to it. But I have a huge advantage.. I am in Okinawa, and I speak Japanese and Okinawan. I can talk to people. I know what they say, I know what they feel.
Relax, Darin. I did not say that mainland Japanese were not victims; I merely called into question the experience of Okinawans as an example of how the nation of Japan was a victim of the war.
Certainly the Okinawan case is dubious. If on August 9, 1945, Pusan had been atomically bombed instead of Nagasaki, would Japanese be able to cite the attack as an example of Japan being a victim? After all, Chosen, like the Ryukyu an Kingdom, was an erstwhile kingdom that became historically recent Japanese territory (1910 versus 1879).
By the way, Darin, for some reason I thought you were in Kyoto. I have never gone to Okinawa, but I’m hoping to sometime soon.
“Relax, Darin”.. why does everyone think I’m pissed all the time? Trust me, you’ll know when I’m not relaxed
I’ve been to Kyoto, and it’s awesome. I would like to live there too some time as well (perhaps you saw my pictures from Kyoto and that’s why you thought I was there). Also, you keep telling me I’m from the Dakota’s too…. why is that? I’m from Wisconsin if it matters. I went to school in Minnesota but ran some track meets in South Dakota.. Perhaps you found that on google when searching for my name?
My thinking still stands the same though, why can’t the Japanese be victims of the Imperial Japanese army as well? If America hadn’t dropped a bomb on Nagasaki, Japanese citizens would still be able to say they are victims of America just the same as bombs where dropped on Hiroshima, and Tokyo (and many other cities) where burnt to the ground as well. I’m not saying America was wrong to (fire/nuke) bomb Japan, as I think it was necessary (however I do question the need for the second nuke on Nagasaki) to end the war, but that doesn’t mean the average citizen who’s only crime was living can’t be a victim too.
With war, everyone looses. People often say that Japan claims to be the only victim because in it’s war movies only suffering Japanese are shown. But that’s simply a lack of understanding on those people’s parts. The purpose of showing Japanese people suffering in Japanese war movies is to show that this is what happens with wars. It doesn’t matter who wins or looses on the battlefield, because in reality everyone looses, so just don’t go to war. This is much different then American thinking and American movies as there was no fighting on (mainland) american soil. American movies show ‘our boys’ killing to save the world in Europe and the Pacific because there really wasn’t all that much suffering on the home front, at least nothing compared to what was going on in Japan.
With war, everyone looses.
Damn straight. If North Korean Rodongs suddenly started raining down on Yongsan right now, I’d shit my pants.
doh. ‘loses’
See, I go ahead and use the built in spell-checker from apple in tiger for everything I type online, and it has given me a much better image because I am a terrible speller, but it needs a grammar checker like the one in word as well….
Marmot has been a bit busy with work and uploading his old Wordpress archives onto the new site. Sorry.
A classic European case of the perpetual victim syndrome is with Serbian nationalists who are still fighting some battle they lost against the Ottoman Turks. I find it quite ironic that South Koreans seem to feel a lot more of the victim complex than North Koreans.
Perhaps when you’re own government constantly threatens you with arrest, death, and uncertainty, worrying about Japan is a distant 3rd or 4th…the 2nd one being of course those running dog capitalists down in Yongsan.
“Relax, Darin”.. why does everyone think I’m pissed all the time? Trust me, you’ll know when I’m not relaxed
Well, you just seemed to jump into a spirited offense-like defense.
I’ve been to Kyoto, and it’s awesome. I would like to live there too some time as well (perhaps you saw my pictures from Kyoto and that’s why you thought I was there).
I think I may have misinterpreted my sitemter data. You’re a frequent visitor and commenter on my blog, but don’t think I’ve had a visitor listed as from Okinawa. Your visits seemed to correspond with someone with an IP in Kyoto. My mistake.
Also, you keep telling me I’m from the Dakota’s too…. why is that? I’m from Wisconsin if it matters. I went to school in Minnesota but ran some track meets in South Dakota.. Perhaps you found that on google when searching for my name?
Yes. Because that’s what I do in my spare time.
My thinking still stands the same though, why can’t the Japanese be victims of the Imperial Japanese army as well?
“The Japanese,” as in all Japanese? No. Japan was the aggressor and there were quite a few Japanese who supported the war while the going was good. Once the tide turned and their cities were bombed, how could those same people be “victims” of a war they enthusiastically supported.
For Japanese who did not support the war and yet suffered from it (lost family members, had their homes destroyed, etc.), yes, I would consider them victims of their own country’s aggression. Okinawans make for clearer victims than the ethnic Japanese do.
If America hadn’t dropped a bomb on Nagasaki, Japanese citizens would still be able to say they are victims of America just the same as bombs where dropped on Hiroshima, and Tokyo (and many other cities) where burnt to the ground as well.
I don’t agree in the case of those who had supported the war, which was a sizable number of Japanese people. The numbers who were against it may be higher than we realize, because people certainly couldn’t speak out against the war, but there were clear supporters of the war, and they are not victims in my book.
I’m not saying America was wrong to (fire/nuke) bomb Japan, as I think it was necessary (however I do question the need for the second nuke on Nagasaki) to end the war, but that doesn’t mean the average citizen who’s only crime was living can’t be a victim too.
I agree, although I’m guessing we might not necessarily agree on how common such people were in Japan in, say, 1937 or 1941.
With war, everyone looses.
Yes. But some people more than others. Unlike the Japanese, the people of China, Singapore, Hong Kong, the Philippines, Guam, etc., had zero say in what was happening to them.
People often say that Japan claims to be the only victim because in it’s war movies only suffering Japanese are shown. But that’s simply a lack of understanding on those people’s parts. The purpose of showing Japanese people suffering in Japanese war movies is to show that this is what happens with wars. It doesn’t matter who wins or looses on the battlefield, because in reality everyone looses, so just don’t go to war.
Fair enough. Except the message being pushed by Japan’s far right today is that war is a horrible, horrible thing, but a sometimes necessary thing. Then come the justifications for going to war against Russia, China, and then fighting America in the war that America forced them into.
This is much different then American thinking and American movies as there was no fighting on (mainland) american soil. American movies show ‘our boys’ killing to save the world in Europe and the Pacific because there really wasn’t all that much suffering on the home front, at least nothing compared to what was going on in Japan.
Again, a major difference that needs to be considered is that Japan as a country brought the suffering on itself. I think that is one reason some people are disgusted and/or annoyed by the Japan-as-victim idea.
By way of parallel, it’s like North Korea whining about the destruction the United States caused during the Korean War. Yeah, it was a lot?and arguably in excess of what was necessary?but none of it would have happened if the DPRK had stayed on their side of the 38th parallel. The only victims I see in North Korea were those that wanted to leave prior to June 25, 1950, but couldn’t.
It reminds me of a quote from “Cold Mountain,” which takes place in the American Civil War, in which Ruby’s character says, “They call this war a cloud over the land. But they made the weather and then they stand in the rain and say ‘Shit, it’s raining!’”
Shit, it’s raining.
Kushibo Wrote:
I can say the same thing about Koreans, who supported Japan’s wars in China and the Pacific, but who started claiming to be victims when Japan lost.
This paragraph stuck out in my head…
Darin wrote:
People often say that Japan claims to be the only victim because in it’s war movies only suffering Japanese are shown.
Actually, I hadn’t heard people “often say” this. It sounds like a point that is made during a discussion of whether Japan as a whole does adequately present the suffering of the countries it invaded.
But that’s simply a lack of understanding on those people’s parts.
Hmm… judging by what you read, I think it’s an unwillingness to accept this particular justification for this apologist point.
The purpose of showing Japanese people suffering in Japanese war movies is to show that this is what happens with wars.
What happens in wars is that Japanese suffer?
Sorry, Darin, but I don’t buy it. What you just said would be a justification for showing Japanese suffering during wars of Japanese aggression.
However, it would NOT be a justification for showing only Japanese suffering (recall that you referred to a criticism that “in it’s war movies only suffering Japanese are shown”).
It doesn’t matter who wins or looses on the battlefield, because in reality everyone looses, so just don’t go to war.
Fine, except the Japanese far-right wing, with Yasukuni as their purveyor of truth, have said it’s okay to sometimes go to war?even though everyone suffers?and it is promoting a low threshold of justified necessity for getting into conflict.
Gerry Bevers wrote:
“Japan was the aggressor and there were quite a few Japanese who supported the war while the going was good. Once the tide turned and their cities were bombed, how could those same people be “victims” of a war they enthusiastically supported.
I can say the same thing about Koreans, who supported Japan’s wars in China and the Pacific, but who started claiming to be victims when Japan lost.
Take out the commas from your sentence, to make it look like this…I can say the same thing about Koreans who supported Japan’s wars in China and the Pacific, but who started claiming to be victims when Japan lost….and I might agree for the most part. In your version, it appears Koreans as a whole were enthusiastic supporters of the war, and therefore not victims of World War II.
In my version, the Koreans who did in fact enthusiastically support Japan during the war?considerably less than the whole but a sizable contingent nonetheless?could not be considered victims of World War II.
But now I wonder, Gerry, in this discussion, who was talking about Koreans as victims of World War II? It was not I. When I wrote this sentence…Unlike the Japanese, the people of China, Singapore, Hong Kong, the Philippines, Guam, etc., had zero say in what was happening to them…. I deliberately left out Korea, Taiwan, and Okinawa. One could not say those three “had zero say,” because even if they had no choice in Japan’s leaders during the lead-up to Japanese militarism and their respective countries were pedestrians in the crosswalk rather than passenger-side occupants as the Imperial Japanese machine roared through the East Asia Co-Prosperity Sphere, the fact is that some of them did choose to volunteer for the military, helped earn money for war, or otherwise promoted the war.
Those people are not victims of the war.
But why do you so frequently feel the need to insert this kind of thing, even where it’s not really relevant? Let’s say for the sake of argument that you are 100% correct and Korea really “was a willing ally to Japan in the China and Pacific Wars,” then how does bringing up that truth* have bearing on whether the Japanese were victims of World War II?
* Gerry’s truth:Korea was an ally to Japan. The sooner Koreans face up to that fact, the sooner they can stop wasting their time and energy trying to cover it up by bashing Japan at every possible opportunity.
Darin has a point. If hirohito were tried as an a “war criminal’ and were found guilty and were hung or put in front of a firing squad, I think much of the hatred vented by the koreans and the chinese might not be so.
After all, the japanese royal family lives on while the chinese and the korean royalty were eliminated at the hands of the japanese. it does a lot for the national pysche. just look at countries like england and norway, how their royalty are adored by their public in general. had hitler lived, and the german people in some way defended or protected him, I don’t think their neighbors would be so nonchalant about ww2 and germanys role in it. my humble opinion.
Something not touched on is 19th century victimization of Japan, or the perception of potential victimization. Japan, faced by the imminent threat of colonialization by Western powers, and promptly modernized and industrialized.
Kushibo wrote:
The “Japanese Empire” was the agressor, and Korea was part of that empire. You simply said, “Japan was the agressor….” I just wanted to remind you that Korea was part of it, too.
Kushibo Wrote:
So, Kushibo, you believe that civilians killed by indicriminate firebombing of cities cannot be considered victims because they supported the war? In war, civilians can also be targets? Or should they be surveyed first to determine if they support the war? Would it have have been all right for Japanese troops to kill US and Chinese civilians who supported their country’s war on Japan?
Kushibo wrote:
Kushibo, you do not know how many Koreans “enthusiastically” supported the war, just as you do not know how many Japanese enthusiastically supported the war, yet you seem to be classifying Koreans differently by using the phrase, “considerably less than the whole.”
Kushibo wrote:
Kushibo, you seemed to be questioning Japan’s right to say that they were also victims of the war. I posted what I did to say that the rights of other countries could be questioned, too. By the way, the original discussion was not just about the Japanese claiming they were victims.
Kushibo Wrote:
If Hirohito was a war criminal, then couldn’t Roosevelt, Truman, Churchill, Stalin, and Chinese leaders also be considered war criminals since they approved the the killing of innocent civilians? They were not shot or hanged, yet the Japanese do not seem to be venting much hatred against the US, Russia, and China. By the way, Korean fought on the side of Japan against China, so why are Koreans joining with China to vent their hatred?
Kushibo Wrote:
It is not only my truth, Kushibo. Was Korea not an ally to Japan? If you agree that they were, do you not think that Koreans have been trying to cover it up by bashing Japan?
In relation to if I’m from the Dakot’s…“Yes. Because that’s what I do in my spare time.”
Well to be honest, it almost seems that way because I have no other idea as to why one would think I’m from the Dakotas.
“What happens in wars is that Japanese suffer? ;)”
No, people suffer. The Japanese are people too. It’s easier for a Japanese person to relate to a Japanese person suffering then perhaps a Korean or Chinese person suffering. It’s not to say that suffering didn’t happen in China or Korea, but it will hit home much harder when the suffering is actually at home.
“Japan was the aggressor and there were quite a few Japanese who supported the war while the going was good.”
Yes, the average brainwashed Japanese citizen supported the war. But when feed the lies they were, it would only make sense that they supported the war. You try to paint the picture of the Japanese being these beats, but I think you’ve got it all wrong. Remember when America invaded Iraq? The public was split on the decision. The public was split on something like that in today’s world where we have the internet, and freedom of information. Now rewind 60 years ago to Japan. Picture modern day North Korea for a reference. The people did not really know what was going on. There was no freedom of information, there was no TV or internet. The people had no choice to believe what they were told. You seem to take your right to do research on the internet for granted and pretend that the internet existed 60 years ago. We all must look at the issue in context. We now know a lot more then the average person did 60 years ago.
“we might not necessarily agree on how common such people were in Japan in, say, 1937 or 1941.”
We certainly do not. You seem to think they had freedom and open information. That would be wrong. The war the average Japanese person was supported wasn’t even real, they were told lies of a false war that never took place, with enemies that did not exist.
“Unlike the Japanese, the people of China, Singapore, Hong Kong, the Philippines, Guam, etc., had zero say in what was happening to them.”
Wrong, the average Japanese had zero say in anything. If you stood up against the army, you were executed on the spot.
“Except the message being pushed by Japan’s far right today is that war is a horrible, horrible thing, but a sometimes necessary thing. Then come the justifications for going to war against Russia, China, and then fighting America in the war that America forced them into.”
As long as Japan has a right wing, the world is safe. The problem is when the right wing becomes the comon way of thinking like it has in certain countries in the world. The right wing in Japan is a good thing, because right wing = freak. That is not to say that the right wing does not need to be paid attention to and kept in check, they need to be watched, and are. The leaders of the right wing are kept under 24-Hour FBI style surveillance in Japan. (As are members of the communist party and probably the North Korean political party after yesterday it was learnt that the de facto North Korean embassy in Japan stole top secret data on Japans missile defense system and handed it over to North Korea.) http://www.sankei.co.jp/news/060125/sha019.htm
“Again, a major difference that needs to be considered is that Japan as a country brought the suffering on itself.”
So which is it? First you say Japan didn’t suffer, now you say they brought it upon themselves?
“Actually, I hadn’t heard people “often say” this. It sounds like a point that is made during a discussion of whether Japan as a whole does adequately present the suffering of the countries it invaded.”
Maybe that’s the way it should be presented, but that’s not how it is presented.
“Fine, except the Japanese far-right wing, with Yasukuni as their purveyor of truth, have said it’s okay to sometimes go to war?even though everyone suffers?and it is promoting a low threshold of justified necessity for getting into conflict.”
Ah yes, Kushibo brings out my favorite place in the world, Yasukuni, to show how little he really knows about Japanese people. You studdied Japanese history very hard in school, I’ll commend you on that. But you clearly know very little about Japanese people. Emotion is not something you can study in a textbook. If you’re going to tell me I know nothing of Korea because I haven’t been their, then I guess I have to throw the same thing back at you. You’re tour of hate through Japan truly does not count. I too went to Yasukuni looking for trouble, I believed all that people were saying about it and went to confirm if for myself. As did you correct? You went and found exactly what you expected correct? I went and found that all these people that speak poorly of Yasukuni are only showing how little they know about Japan.
If the issue is, “does the average Japanese person feel sorry for what happened?”, then that becomes an emotional issue. I encourage you to speak to a Japanese person about that, as emotions are not something you can read on the internet. I believe you will find people are indeed very remorseful for what happened. HOWEVER, try and make someone apologize, and you’re going to get no where. Why? Because you’re trying to make someone who did nothing apologize, it’s not going to work. Individuals feel sorry for something that they personally did not do, I think that’s amazing, but should be expected. Every main political leader in Japan since the war has apologized on a personal and public level, that’s pretty impressive, but also should be expected. But what exactly is Japan lacking on this issue? Remorse? No, I think that’s been covered.
Good point as always. Like China, Japan had unequal treaties forced down its throat by the Western powers, and the fact that Japan didn’t become a British, French, Russian or American colony was nothing short of a miracle. We could also discuss the fact that even after Japan joined the “Big Boys,” so to speak, it had to work damn hard to earn respect from the Western colonial powers.
But with all that I had to say above, my true point is simple. The Japanese people too were a victim of the Japanese Empire, a victim of the corrupt dictatorship that used the Empire as a puppet. The same corrupt dictatorship that caused inexpressible amounts of pain and suffering to people all over Asia, and the world.
This should be a common understanding between the people of Asia, and they should all be united against the corrupt dictatorships of China and North Korea. But instead all the slaves of the corrupt dictatorships are brainwashed to believe that the average Japanese citizen is their enemy.
Quick note about something I missed the first time since I’m doing a Kushibo style line-by-line here..
However, it would NOT be a justification for showing only Japanese suffering (recall that you referred to a criticism that “in it’s war movies only suffering Japanese are shown”).
Most (all?) Japanese war movies do no actually show any fighting, but just what life was like back home. Accordingly, it would be more then a little bit of bad directing to suddenly jump to a scene and Korea and say, “but at least our boys got their sexual desires filled!”. Perhaps that’s the way you want movies to go — thankfully you’re not a director
***Note, when I say ‘war movies’, I mean movies about WW2, not movies about just any war. This note is to prevent against someone bringing up some futuristic anime about a war in the 3012 where it shows fighting and no suffering, I’m sure there are plenty of anime like that… I just try my darndest to avoid cartoons.
Japan is doing a bad job apologizing for its atrocities during WWII. Koizumi still goes to Yasukuni temple, further angering the Chinese and Koreans.
The pent-up anger against Japan is bringing the Chinese and Koreans closer. With China getting stronger every day, it is a matter of time for Korea to join the China camp.
Then, the war will come. The war between China and Japan, using Korea as the front troops. The recent visit by KJI to China with his generals should be viewed in this frame of mind.
Quick note about something I missed the first time since I’m doing a Kushibo style line-by-line here..
It’s not like I invented it. Had this type of posting originated with me, it would be called kushing instead of fisking.
Anyway, about the fisking of my comments, there are too many misquotes (especially of the type where the words I carefully chose were changed when someone paraphrased me, and my critic then argues not the point I made but the one that resulted from the misparaphrasing) and quotes mistakenly attributed to me (when did I ever suggest that Hirohito should have been executed? I would probably go so far as to say that none of the Yasukuni-14 should not have been executed either) for me to kush/fisk this right now.
But for now I’ll just summarize for those who missed it: Whether Korean or Japanese, those who enthusiastically supported the war probably should not be considered victims. Japan as a country, the aggressor nation, is not a victim. Similarly, North Koreans who supported the regime of Kim Ilsung cannot be considered victims of “American aggression.”
Individuals may be victims; but not all individuals are victims. Having suffered does not make one a victim, not if one supported the circumstances that led to the suffering.
Darin,
What Japanese WWII movies are you referring to? Off the top of my head I can think of a few that I’ve seen, and perhaps half of them were set overseas. Of the ones I’ve seen, The Human Condition and Under the Flag of the Rising Sun rather unflinchingly show Japanese atrocities. Both question the military and rulers who led Japan to ruin - the money quote in the latter film being “The government didn’t ask anybody’s permission to start the war. But we’re the ones stuck paying for all of it.” These films were made by directors who were rather critical of the war and the Japanese government, and so may not be representative of the usual attitude.
Two other films that come to mind are The Burmese Harp, which focuses more on Japanese war dead and an attempt at redemption by a single soldier, and Grave of the Fireflies, an animated film about the effects of the war on children; all of these films are among the best anti-war films I’ve seen, and none play up the Japan-as-victim angle; they basically just say ‘War sucks’ (with the addition, in the first two movies, of “and so does our government”).
As I write this, a few others come to mind, like ‘Merry Christmas Mr Lawrence’ and a film about Okinawa, set overseas, as well as ‘Dr. Akagi’ and ‘Black Rain’, which are both set at home. Perhaps it just reflects the small sample of WWII movies I’ve seen (out of 100+ Japanese movies I’ve watched), but those I’ve seen are pretty evenly divided between being set at home and abroad, with a number of them being very critical of the war.
As for the responsibility of Japanese who supported the war, how much is this responsibility mitigated by the fact of censorship (Were the people who supported the war aware of the suffering their troops were causing?), severe punishment for dissidents, and, for the younger generation who were of conscription age at the start of the Pacific war, 10 years of a military government indoctrinating them in school? For the younger generation in particular, the ones who were doing much of the fighting, how much of the blame should be shifted to the government for the militaristic, jingoistic education they received?
about the fisking of my comments, there are too many misquotes (especially of the type where the words I carefully chose were changed when someone paraphrased me, and my critic then argues not the point I made but the one that resulted from the misparaphrasing)
I’m using the copy and paste approach. I’m changing no wording. However I completely understand your frustration on that one. It happens to me all the time too. Before you know it your simple “the sky is blue” quote becomes “the nazi Russians painted the sky blue with tarantulas and the world is now suffering.. therefore me must eliminate all Swedish people from the earth!”…
Japan as a country, the aggressor nation, is not a victim. Similarly, North Koreans who supported the regime of Kim Ilsung cannot be considered victims of “American aggression.”
So then I guess the people that died/were injured during the subway attacks in London are also not victim’s because they “brought it upon themselves”? England supported the war on Iraq, does that mean it’s citizens are fair game?
It seems as though you think that way (PLEASE tell me I’m wrong, I very much hope I’m misunderstanding you), if that is the case then apparently we have a very fundamentally different understanding of the value of human life. I think killing of human beings is wrong under all circumstances, you seem to think killing can be justified. Yet you criticize this ‘Japanese right-wing’ for saying sometimes wars just have to be fought?
I’m not arguing the whole country of Japan is the victim, that’s insane, but the common person are each individual victims. They share that with the common Chinese and Korean person who was also a victim of the same Japanese Empire. This should be something to bring the people of Asia together, and unite them against N. Korea’s regime and China’s regime. However, since most people are living under one of those regimes (or under the lie that one of those isn’t a regime but really their friend), it’s easier to come together and say the Japanese got what they deserved, and they deserve more, and it’s up to us to give it to them since international laws and the international community wont.
Look how caught up you get into a simple one line point I made (the Japanese citizens were victims too) that you completely ignore what I am actually saying, that the people of Asia should all be working together against N. Korea and China. However right now all the brainwashed disciples are wound up and ready to attack the Japanese enemy that does not exist. What they don’t realize is after they attack, they become the aggressor and not the victim. They don’t realize that their crime will be just the same as the crime they are trying to avenge, because they will be attacking people born after WW2, who did committed no crime.
Individuals may be victims; but not all individuals are victims. Having suffered does not make one a victim, not if one supported the circumstances that led to the suffering.
Again what about the people of London? Fair game? What about you? Am I justified in killing you because America started a war? Apparently some people think so.
You seem to keep missing my point that the average Japanese citizen didn’t know the real truth about the war that was going on. Remember, no internet 60 years ago? Remember, control of information? For example there were hall monitors in the hall ways of schools not monitoring the halls, but the teachers. In every class room there were pictures of the Emperor hanging (sounds like Kim^2’s NK??). Every morning a special ceremony was held to open the case the Emperor’s picture was held in…
Movies… Bulgasari I have not seen any of the movies you mentioned, but I will be sure to check them out. However your description seems to show that they show the common ‘people suffer — no war’ theme correct? I don’t recall saying Japanese movies play the victim angle, but it’s very possible I said something that could easily be misinterpreted.
I’ll mention more about the movies I’ve seen later today, for now I’ve gotta run to school.
Darin, I am making too entirely different distinctions: one that many (but not all) individuals within even an aggressor country are victims; and another that the country itself that instigated war in a manner such as Japan or North Korea is not a victim. I have made that distinction fairly clear, but in your response you have sloppily interchanged them to argue against a conclusion that does not address what I’ve said or believe.
So many Japanese individuals were victims, but they were victims of Japan, not of the United States (as the Japanese right-wing seems to suggest). That does not make all actions of the United States justifiable (I don’t think the bombing of Nagasaki was justifiable, nor for that matter Hiroshima).
What I don’t have time to get into right now is that in the historical revisionism of Japan’s far-right, there are perhaps legitimate reminders of Japan’s suffering, BUT a very low threshold for when it’s okay for Japan to instigate wars, which it distorts into defensive wars (e.g., China and Korea).
One last point about your assertion that information was highly limited seventy and sixty-five years ago. This is true, but the people still knew that war was going on. They knew of the victories and they were elated by them. Unless they were led to believe that NOBODY WAS DYING as a result of Japan’s conquests, they were supporters of war and its trappings. Their opposition came when it was no longer Chinese, Australians, Brits, Filipinos, and Americans being killed but suddenly and unexpectedly Japanese.
This “they” is of course not everyone in Japan at the time. For the sake of convenient argument, let’s say it might have been half. The other half are the victims, then, but the half that supported war when the going was good may have suffered, but they are not victims.
At any rate, Japan as an entity was NOT a victim of World War II. But to spell it out for you, many millions of its citizens were, but they were victims of Japan, not some other country.
Kushibo:
You say about Japanese citizens: “they were victims of Japan”
I say (about fifty times): “But with all that I had to say above, my true point is simple. The Japanese people too were a victim of the Japanese Empire, a victim of the corrupt dictatorship that used the Empire as a puppet. The same corrupt dictatorship that caused inexpressible amounts of pain and suffering to people all over Asia, and the world.
This should be a common understanding between the people of Asia, and they should all be united against the corrupt dictatorships of China and North Korea. ”
What’s the problem here?
“Darin, I am making too entirely different distinctions: one that many (but not all) individuals within even an aggressor country are victims; and another that the country itself that instigated war in a manner such as Japan or North Korea is not a victim. I have made that distinction fairly clear, but in your response you have sloppily interchanged them to argue against a conclusion that does not address what I’ve said or believe.”
I’ll be the first to admit I’m not the best arguer in the world, but I’m learning and i think i’m getting better. However I do think you are completely avoiding my point… the people of japan and the people of korea suffered from the same corruption, why can’t that be a point to bring them together? (instead you tell me okinawa isn’t japan and it’s okay to kill civilians if their country starts a war. so then is it okay to kill me? i’m american. america started a war. perhaps it’s okay to kill me because i’m in japan now? japan sent troops to iraq too.. )
if you want to say that the civilians that burnt to their death in tokyo fire bombings are not victims because they supported a war that they did not know the truth about, fine, i’ll give you that point, i disagree, but i don’t give a crap as my point is japan, korea, china and the rest of the world should come together against corrupt leaderships… they suffered under the same sort of corruption that europeans did as well, the whole world should be united against china and north korea. i don’t know how many times i need to say it before you’ll address it, so this will be my last try. this page is getting way to long, and half of it is me saying the same thing over and over again without it being addressed.
Darin wrote:
you tell me okinawa isn’t japan and it’s okay to kill civilians if their country starts a war.
No, I did not say that.
i don’t know how many times i need to say it before you’ll address it, so this will be my last try. this page is getting way to long, and half of it is me saying the same thing over and over again without it being addressed.
Sorry, Darin. You wouldn’t know it sometimes, but I actually have a life?both professional and social?outside of this blog. I’ll get to it when I can.
Japan is doing a bad job apologizing for its atrocities during WWII. Koizumi still goes to Yasukuni temple, further angering the Chinese and Koreans.
The pent-up anger against Japan is bringing the Chinese and Koreans closer. With China getting stronger every day, it is a matter of time for Korea to join the China camp.
Then, the war will come. The war between China and Japan, using Korea as the front troops. The recent visit by KJI to China with his generals should be viewed in this frame of mind.