Comment by James

November 16, 2006 @ 6:00 pm

I agree with you on the textbook thing, dude: Our congress shouldn’t get involved in the bickering between Japan and Korea over what details Japan prints in its textbooks when we ourselves don’t go out of our way to air our dirty laundry in US history textbooks. Resolution 759 is just another battle in the viciously anti-Japanese political agenda of radical nationalists in Korea.

Comment by DeOrio

November 16, 2006 @ 7:33 pm

Next thing you know, Korean ultranationalists will be carving up Mount Rushmore. When it will it end?

Then again, radical nationalists in Japan hate the Koreans and Chinese, Chinese ultranationalists can direct some of their bile at America, but who else do Korean ultranationalists have to go after? North Korea? There’s no shock value in that. They can’t “know” the terrible truth about North Korea; everybody knows it. They have to fume and fuss at Japan.

As I said over at Japan Probe, let both sides go to the disputed uninhabited island of Takeshima/Dok-do and duke it out. Rational people could just “forget” to send the boats back to pick them up. Korea’s going to have its one-way rivalry with Japan no matter what and Japanese mainstream opinion seems to want the issue to go away.

Comment by DeOrio

November 16, 2006 @ 9:35 pm

It’s important to add that while we referenced the work of Dr. Robert C. Angel of USC, recommend his podcast, have exchanged e-mails and links with him, and were lucky enough to receive his encouragement, he in no way endorses our explanation of issues he has spent a career studying or the views we express.
We admire the man, but are not his acolytes, and he’s been kind to us, but would surely be able to offer correction on points we made and would be able to flesh things out to a degree that would make our eyes pop out.

Comment by ken

November 17, 2006 @ 1:01 am

he in no way endorses our explanation of issues he has spent a career studying or the views we express

I think it’s safe to assume that no one does.

James: I’d like to see an end to the hypocrisy, though I do think nations should be calling each other on BS. Issues such as representation of the war at Yushukan, and whether or not the US deals with its own dark past events certainly have a place in the public discourse. I don’t know if any nation could really claim to have the moral high ground in terms of telling any other nations what to write in their history books, but I doubt that will stop them from doing so.

Pingback by Japan Probe -Japan News & Culture Blog » Blog Archive » News for November 17, 2006

November 17, 2006 @ 7:26 am

[…] -Trans-Pacific Radio takes a look at the Japan lobby and its power in Washington. […]

Comment by DeOrio

November 17, 2006 @ 10:32 am

I think hypocrisy is too often used as a cop-out anyway.
Is an uyoku any more justified in attacking a Taiwanese protester at the Yushukan because Korean museums portray every Japanese businessman or soldier from the occupation era as maniacally laughing demons? Is Japan’s enslavement of the comfort women undone by the American fire bombing of Tokyo? Is Japan’s WWII-era maltreatment of POWs justified by the disappearance of as many as 300,000 Japanese POWs in six days in the USSR?
I don’t think so.

Furthermore, the US’s bad deeds don’t reduce their standing to criticize Japan’s misdeeds. Japan’s misdeeds in no way make their criticism of North Korea any less valid. “But he did it, too. Even worse!” is a valid point to be considered, but is not a valid argument against or refutation of criticism.

Motivation is also too often invoked. Why an issue rose to the fore is good to know, but does not make the issue less salient or less important.

Comment by DeOrio

November 17, 2006 @ 10:33 am

Oh, and I endorse the views we express.

Comment by James

November 17, 2006 @ 5:47 pm

I would argue that America’s own standing when it comes to say, the inclusion in textbooks of passages about the firebombing of Japan, does reduce its moral standing standing to criticize Japan for not including details of Japanese atrocities in WW2. It would be a great thing for Japan to include a few more things in its textbooks, but the reality is that almost every nation on earth deliberately writes its history textbooks to focus on positive events. Unless we practice what we preach in this case, our criticism of Japan’s textbooks can simply be thrown away as hypocracy. I’m not saying that the atrocities nations commit somehow cancel eachother out, I’m just saying that condemning Japanese textbooks for not doing something that we as Americans do can hardly be called a righteous moral stand.

As for North Korea’s dismissal of Japanese condemnation: Since the events are happening right now, as opposed to 60 years ago, it is a completely different issue. I think the Japan of today has every right to criticize North Korea.

Comment by DeOrio

November 17, 2006 @ 7:04 pm

You’re right about Japanese criticism of Japan, on second thought I agree that current and historical events have to be considered separately and have less significant comparative relevance.

I also agree that every country teaches history in a somewhat self-serving way, but if hypocrisy is considered in the determination of the merits of a case, shouldn’t the degree of the “infraction” (for lack of a better term) also be considered?
The US teaches a bowdlerized, self-serving version of history, in most cases, up through high school (my own overwhelmingly Republican Catholic high school gave me a surprisingly revisionist US History course, though not all that much time was spent on post-War events), but there is nothing in the way of directives from the Federal Government directing schools on what textbooks to buy or, beyond bare guidelines, what to include or not include. In the US, the bowdlerization stems from Americans’ inclination to see only the best in themselves; in Japan, it comes from above and looks likely to move even further in that direction.

Given what the US Federal Government does and what the Japanese National Government does in terms of teaching history, the US has all kinds of room to start tossing a few stones.
This is not to say that The US has acknowledged or dealt admirably with all of the numerous black marks in its record, but that there is no US Government stance issuing official denials of the firebombing of Tokyo, the deaths of POWs in US custody, the looting of corpses and cities by US troops. Not doing enough to address something and actively trying to cover it up are two different things.

Furthermore, there’s an enormous difference in what was done. Was American conduct above reproach? No way. Were there rapes committed by American troops and did American troops visit and even construct brothels? Yes. Did the US Government institute a widespread system of kidnapping colonized women into sexual slavery and condone any treatment its nationals gave to such women? No. That’s a large and important difference.

I still think we disagree on a fundamental point, though, James. While you have a good point and make it well, I don’t think one country’s historical wrongs ought to reduce its standing to point out those of other countries. In reality, it does, in a PR sense, which is important, but it is ontologically unimportant.

It’s possible to acknowledge the wrongdoings of a country and their accusations of other countries at the same time, even if they’re being hypocritical about it.
As you said, countries rarely point out their own wrongdoings, so we need other countries to risk a bit of hypocrisy and do so.

Comment by Andy V

November 17, 2006 @ 7:28 pm

Lost in the debate on high school textbooks seems to be the fact that no one reads them.

Comment by DeOrio

November 17, 2006 @ 8:17 pm

A very good point, Andy. It’s true that the most controversial whitewashing textbooks were used in a tiny percentage of schools. There are levels, though. The worst examples of right-wing slant in textbooks are rare, but it’s not as if the rest of the textbooks are great attempts at objectivity.

Comment by Garrett

November 20, 2006 @ 5:33 pm

Sorry, James, I just noticed that I wrote “Japanese criticism of Japan” in comment 886. That should have been “Japanese criticism of North Korea,” of course.

Sorry for the mistake.

Comment by Cal Hobbs

November 29, 2006 @ 1:21 am

I am sick of these belated ‘national apologies’ for atrocities and wrong-doings that happened decades ago.

I don’t think you can apologize for anyone else. If you didn’t do it, your apology is meaningless, at best.

Every nation can look back at its history and find policies and actions that were unjustified and, by today’s standards, inexplicable and wrong. But only the people who enacted those policies or committed the acts can apologize.

Comment by DeOrio

November 29, 2006 @ 1:29 am

I agree to a point, Mr. Hobbs. In the case of official actions in a declared war, though, precedent puts the burden on the government of the nation in question as responsibility is hard to pin down. If a Japanese soldier raped a kidnapped Korean woman, but it was common practice because officialdom condoned and even promoted such actions, who’s to blame? Does the victim have no recourse? That, to me, seems unjust and absurd.

If you were talking about US slavery or British actions in 19th century India, I’d be inclined to agree with you, but the people in power in Japan today reaped the benefits of wartime slave labor and have, in some cases, blocked or stymied efforts at reconciliation. The government of Japan has been able to stall and avoid responsibility for what happened - they shouldn’t be rewarded with clemency for having been able to get away with it, especially not when they could have set things right, or at least taken productive steps, decades ago.

Comment by ken

November 29, 2006 @ 3:05 am

…the people in power in Japan today reaped the benefits of wartime slave labor

You’re not supposed to say that out loud.

Cal: I think you’re comment baiting, but ok…

I am sick of these belated ‘national apologies’ for atrocities and wrong-doings that happened decades ago.

You know what? I just have a really hard time feeling any sympathy for how sick you feel about hearing that nations should apologize for what they’ve done wrong. I feel sick about hearing about atrocities, human rights abuses, and the fact that it’s still going on today - and I find that to be a better sickness to focus on eradicating rather than claiming to be sick of those who wish to hear at least a modicum of responsibility, recognition, or apology.

A nation is a collective whole, and passes from generation to generation. Like it or not, we bear some guilt, collectively, as members of a nation. I used to find it expedient to say, “My family had not emigrated to America until the 20th century, and thus I’m excused from any past guilt.” But the wrongs still leave consequences, ones that are all too real - and we all, each and every one of us, bears the burden of fixing them - which means carrying them forward to the future and attempting to ensure that they never happen again.

The apology, sir, is not the issue - it’s heartfelt human compassion. Recognition. Admission of wrongs. And most of all, quantifiable action in the direction of mending those wrongs.

Comment by DeOrio

November 29, 2006 @ 11:18 am

Good point, Ken. Mr. Hobbs, look at it this way: People in every nation around the world have no problem with accepting a role in their nations’ good deeds or accomplishments; it’s usually done without thinking.
Americans, the majority of whom were born during or after World War II, will talk about how “we” defeated Nazism, how “we” played a central role in the formation of the UN, or how “we” recovered from the Great Depression. How “we” transformed the world for the better through our economic progress. A majority of Americans are descended primarily from people who immigrated to the US in the closing years of the 19th century or later, but still talk about how “we” won our independence; about “our” Founding Fathers.
It is a lot less common, exceedingly rare, in fact, to hear Americans talk about how “we” enslaved people or “we” massacred thousands in our colonization of the Philippines. Not even how “we” tortured people or forced prisoners in Abu Ghraib to pretend to blow each other.

Likewise, people in Japan take the soft life of a solid economy, a high standard of living, not being in wars, and technological advancement as their birthright.
Now, if we are entitled to the benefits of the positive actions of our forebears, are we not similarly entitled to a share of their guilt? Are there no lingering effects from Japan’s actions during World War II? Not having renounced the positive, it is only fair for at least those in power today to accept responsibility for the negative. Waiting it out until actual hands that killed, raped, or robbed are attached to a corpse does not entitle an entire country to live in the stolen house an gain access to riches by standing on the bodies of their victims without remorse or recompense.

Pride in the accomplishments of one’s nation without shame for its atrocities is chauvinism and chauvinism should not be tolerated, much less espoused, by any responsible, thinking human being.

Recognizing the bad along with the good and trying to make the wrong right is how we stop ourselves from repeating the mistakes of the past. Knowing that a war was bad is not enough - people have to make an effort to undo the bad done by the war and take action to avoid future wars. Ignoring the sins of the past is just as bad as ignoring them while they’re going on.

Comment by nipponia

December 11, 2006 @ 1:19 am

if it’s of any interest to you, it maybe worth checking this site : http://www.jiyuu-shikan.org/e/index.html and blog entry : http://blog.livedoor.jp/jiyuu_shikan/archives/50317494.html
they include pretty much of the Japanese side of view. please consider both opinions from both sides. thanks in advance.

Comment by DeOrio

December 11, 2006 @ 1:34 am

Nipponia, I understand self-promotion and all that, but, seriously, listen to the program first, then slyly accuse of being one-sided.

Comment by DeOrio

December 11, 2006 @ 1:56 am

Nipponia, I just took a little look around your site and I’m not going to mark you as spam, but that’s the best I can say. To claim your site represents the “Japanese view” is wholly and completely untrue. Your site represents the views of uyoku at best and is a compilation of articles that ignore all serious historical research and latch onto to unsourced, unverified, unsustainable arguments that mitigate Japanese responsibility for atrocities committed during WWII. On this site, I believe we have done a good job of fairly representing Japanese actions and motivation before and during the War, as well as after, but using militaristic wartime Japanese law to justify what was done during the war is corrupt reasoning and, if you sincerely sought a “cool, unbiased” view of what happened, you would know that.
Furthermore, it irks me, to say the least, that you would imply that the abdication of responsibility was the view of the entire modern nation of Japan. This is quite simply not so.
Japan was not evil, but the Imperial forces of Japan and the military governments of the 1930s and 1940s committed and condoned a number of heinous and inexcusable acts, both inside and outside of Japan.

On top of your ill-informed, negligent articles on Nanjing, HR 759 and the comfort women issue, and other issues, you avoid the foul acts committed against the people of Japan at that time, thus perpetuating the myth that the people of Japan were in a unified mass behind the military governments. This is demonstrably untrue.

I don’t know what you hope to gain by your knee-jerk gainsaying and your rejection of Japanese guilt, but that kind of thinking is why Japan stil has rifts with all of its neighbors and why the Governmenthere has yet to do right by those it wronged.

In the future, if you want to spread this garbage, at least be man enough to do it here. Don’t spam us with comments on a program to which you apparently have not listened and don’t link back to your vapid site.

Comment by ken

December 11, 2006 @ 1:58 am

Nipponia, Did you listen to the program? The reasons and rationale behind the lobby are well stated and even defended at times.

If you actually have specific points to bring up, feel free to do so. Posting a couple of links doesn’t constitute putting forth your own opinion.