Japanese view of WWII

Factual Questions
21

O.K., here’s the first clue: there are other posts in the thread, my post may not have been in response to the OP, but another poster after the OP. Perhaps it was response to the a post that suggested that at least some Japanese schools teach that it was not an immoral war, that the Japanese were no worse than the U.S., that they took Nazi Germany as an ally much in the same way the U.S. took Great Britain, there were no atrocities, etc. Perhaps it was a rebuttal, sarcastic as it may be, to the substance of such teachings. Hmmm.

It’s only a clue - I don’t want to give away the entire puzzle. Let me know if you need more.

22

slyfrog. You obviously forgot which fora you’re in. This is GQ.

If you want to berate another poster, open a new thread in the PIt.

But your attitude and language is unacceptable here.

Don’t do this again.

samclem GQ moderator

23

I’m sorry, I will attempt to calm down. I genuinely did not think that anyone would be stupid enough to presume that every post after post number 1 is in direct response to post number 1 only, and not a comment on other posts or the content expressed therein.

I guess I’m just used to other internet bulletin boards, where people comment on posts after the first one, in addition to the first one. I’ll try to get used to the different format here.

24

That’s great; I’m hoping the same applies to the other posters who gave responses to me unrelated to the GQ. Because those posts weren’t in response to the GQ, right?

25

It is not a matter of compelling every post to be a direct response to the OP (or even any other post). It is a matter of making sure that if you divert the direction of the thread or throw in additional comments, you make sure that everyone knows that you are doing so. Read the first four posts. What in your post would lead anyone to believe that it was an offhand comment rather than a response to the OP, following in the manner of Lumpy’s post? (A clue: if you are responding to something other than the OP, you might try quoting the line to which you are reponding.)

As to the your response to samclem, you might want to check with him, but I suspect that he is challenging your use of epithets (imbecile, stupid, etc.) for others posters rather than your mild hijack.

26

Let’s get this stright right now.

To be charitable, your first post was ambiguous. To whom you were directing it was open to interpretation, as you notice by the other poster’s responses.

I did NOT notice another poster attacking you personally, nor ridiculing your post. Your replies, on the otherhand, were abusive.

You’re bright. I hope my post is clear. If not, email me. Before you dig any deeper.

27

You know what, if scr4 genuine thought that my statement was in response to the original post, such that I was stating with specificity in response to the original post that there is a nameable Japanese school that is teaching that the war atrocities were an acceptable part of Bushido, then I do apologize.

I have seen, far too often on this thread, people who really don’t have much to respond with, who simply respond with cite. Therefore, please understand that when scr4 made the basic response of “cite” the first time, without adding the school part, I really did believe that he was asking me to cite to the fact that atrocities occured, and that these were viewed as being connected in ways with the Bushido code. This turned my stomach.

I still have a hard time believing that someone could possibly read my statement as a response to “what are they teaching in schools,” since I’m not sure why schools would teach that the atrocities are part of Bushido. Nonetheless, if that was the intent, rather than an intent to question or request a cite regarding atrocities (a fact that I hope to god does not need citation at this point on a non-academic message board) or their connection with Bushido (not a citeable fact for the most part, but analysis and opinion), then I at least understand the confusion here, and apologize for helping further it.

As for the use of epithets, I’m afraid that is part of a huge pet peeve I have against the poor (for many reasons) use of “cite” as a kneejerk response here. Of course it is not an attempt to factually assert that scr4 is an imbecile; I have no way of knowing this in a general sense, and based on his ability to use a keyboard and post on a website bulletin board, he clearly has some cognitive ability placing him above that level. Keeping the issue to my pet peeve, I find the use of “cite” as a response in most cases on this board imbecilic behavior in the specific case of the use.

Again, if you are being genuine in having been confused as to what my original post responded to, I apologize. I seriously thought that the actual content of my post regarding atrocities was being questioned. After getting enough responses to glean that you and scr4 might have been genuinely mistaken as to my intent and not simply baiting me, it made your follow-up posts seem less like those of assholish atrocity deniers and more like reasonable human beings.

28

Yeah, as was taking my response, and simply saying, “I suppose you have a cite for this.” Once that response was connected with it being a cite that it was taught in schools, it became a little bit clearer that it wasn’t a request for a cite that atrocities occured.

Well, I took what I perceived to be a request for a citation that atrocities occured, or that they were in some way connected with Bushido, to be a bit insulting.

As I state in a post I created while you were typing this, I took what I saw as the questioning of atrocities as a fairly major insult. If that was not the intent, then I am fine.

By the way, what do you deem to be insulting? Is the eyerolling smiley insulting to a poster to whom it is used in response? What do you deem that smiley is intended to say in connection with a post? Just curious.

29

It seems that I’m always a minute or two behind tomndebb ,or you composing your reply to him. :slight_smile:

I never thought about the eyerolling smiley that was used by scr4. Now that I go back and look at it, I don’t see it as anything other than part of a post which didn’t understand where your original post was being directed. I understand how you could have seen it in a different light.

30

MY MOTIVE IS UNDERSTOOD! And it only took me about 10 posts to get there. Shows what a great writer I am; I write so fluently and well that my audience understands my points in nanoseconds without effort. :slight_smile:

Okay, I hereby engage everyone in a metaphorical big hug, and return you to your threadtopic regarding the Japanese view of WWII.

31

Back to the OP…

Regarding the Japanese view of WWII.

Here is an CNN article from 2002
http://edition.cnn.com/2002/WORLD/asiapcf/east/04/10/japan.skorea.textbook/

32

That’s not too hard to accept…I objected to how everyone was portrayed in Pearl Harbor. As well as the plant life, and inanimate objects. :smiley:

And I thought I might note…Remember Unit 731, the unit that performed the horrific experiments on civilians and prisoners in Manchuria? They have a memorial in Tokyo. Not to the victims of 731…for the Japanese military personnel. :eek: :mad:

(Sadly, the fact that Unit 731’s activities have been glossed over probably has a lot to do with the fact that the U.S. didn’t prosecute those guys for war crimes, in exchange for the bio warfare data they’d accumulated. Not exactly our finest hour…but that’s a different subject for another day.)

33

FWIW, I admit that I don’t know if any Japanese textbooks mention the execution of Tojo and the others convicted in the war crimes trials. But speaking of Unit 731, check out This site from which I quote:

34

This is probably.out of topic. I’m Asian, Singaporean to be precise. I learnt Modern History in Sec School(that was ages ago). All it have in the text book were simple straight facts. All Asian nations know the brutality of Japanese during the WW2. Japanese however do not know these side of the story. That is why sometimes Japanese tourist would be shock and crying when they visit Historical sites of Japanese occupation. They hate Chinese mostly. And Civilians were lined Along.the coastal shore and shot dead. They took POW, civilians included and made them built railway track from Thailand (i think) to I can’t remember where but I think Msia. But forget all bad things, what pisses Asian is that JPanese are oblivious to all these. To us its just isn’t fair. No offence.Japs, I.do love your anime and mangas…But pls just admit that you did something awful a long time ago.

35

I hate to disagree with you on the point in bold above, but the Japanese were brutal to the civilian populations in their occupied territories. I recall one particular incident described by an American POW during a march to a POW camp. He told a story of a Japanese guard coming upon a family standing by the side of the road. The mother was holding her infant in her arms and the Japanese guard walked up, put his pistol to the head of the infant and pulled the trigger. The American POW recalled that the Japanese guard actually laughed after the event. No, I don’t have cite handy and it is too late for me to pull the book out to find the title and page number, so you will have to take my word for it.

I am not trolling here, but we should never gloss over the brutality of the Japanese army during WWII. To civilians and POW’s alike. They starved, beat and tortured thousands. In fact during the island hopping campaign American GI’s ended up seeing the Japanese soldier and as some have said the Japanese race as a whole as sub-human. This attitude came from seeing the remains of American soldiers that were captured by the Japanese. They were found beheaded, dis-embowled and even eaten, their skin and muscle cut away like a butchered cow. It was not uncommon for US GI’s to have a take no prisoners attitude during the campaign as a Japanese soldier couldn’t be trusted. It was not uncommon for a Japanese soldier to surrender only to detonate a hidden grenade as he was being taken into custody. Or not uncommon for a wounded Japanese soldier to lie with a grenade under himself, waiting for a US medic to come to his aid and blow them both up. It became such a common event that eventually every single Japanese soldier, wounded or surrendering was shot dead. Not because the GI’s were hell bent on killing every one they could find, but because they didn’t want to die trying to do the right thing.

I will agree the firebombing and atomic bombing of the Japanese mainland was horrific and very sad. However it was necessary to force the surrender of the Japanese government. It is sickening to hear that Japanese school children are being taught that America was the evil ones via these acts while glossing over the in-human acts committed by the Japanese army. The Japanese might be ashamed of their behavior during WWII, but to try to focus outrage on the US isn’t the way to clean their hands.

36

Zombie thread BTW.

37

Has the curriculum changed in the last 8 years?

38

My kid just asked me this very question a couple of weeks ago and I had no clue what to tell him. I think he will find his answer right here. Thanks Dopers!!

39

Or at least various opinions and some good responses.

40

From my own children’s textbooks in Elementary and Junior High School here in Japan:

In Elementary they are taught nothing whatsoever about the war in terms of history or politics. There is a short unit on wartime life for kids in Tokyo featuring food shortages, fire bombings and air raids etc and it’s presented as “War is terrible for civilians and children.” I had some facsimiles of UK ration books, photos of kids in air raid shelters and the like so I gave them to my son to take in and show his class. There was general amazement that it had also happened to kids in countries other than Japan.

In the 5th grade for the school play (that the entire school and parents and grandparents and local bigwigs come to see) the theme was invariably the Hiroshima bombings, from the point of view of the kids suffering. All very well, and they usually end with “WAR IS TERRIBLE, LET’S STOP WAR” (cos you know, 5th graders are all capable of that, right now, this instant) but the whole thing was presented as happening out of the blue, by “The Americans” to “The innocent citizens of Japan who were going about their business on a bright summer’s day.”

My (Japanese) husband and I took great exception to this and we spent a lot of time first of all educating our son on the situation as a whole, which being a blabbermouth he took to school and told all his classmates and teacher (who personally was an extremely reasonable man and who agreed with everything the kid pointed out). We then asked for the play script to be cancelled and a non-war subject chosen. At first this was refused but when my husband said then our son would be pulled out of school for each hour that rehearsals and performances took place, they realised we were deadly serious.

In the end, the class teacher, the principal and vice principal came to a meeting at our house, and brought the whole play script, and we listened as they gave their reasons for putting on the play - To teach kids that war is terrible and affects innocent people, basically. Which is true. I agreed, and argumentatively suggested that in that case, they put on a play about the suffering of the children prisoners of the Japanese in Singapore and Malaysia. This was my ignoble low point!

Then they listened while my husband put his points, which were that our son is in some ways a living embodiment of peace, in that his grandfathers were on opposite sides in the war but that we his parents had met and produced our kids into a happy family and a happy society, and that we were not going to have that sullied with over-dramatic and over simplistic kid plays about what went on in the war. Even though the teacher talked to the kids in the class about what went on before and after Hiroshima, we pointed out that the entire school and audience had not had the benefit of these balancing discussions and that one of the most uncomfortable moments of my time here in Japan had been the previous year when I and my American friend had had to sit through the then 5th graders announcing on stage in front of us that “The British and Americans bombed poor innocent Hiroshima citizens” and then put on an excruciating play where the elder brother urges his younger brother trapped under their burning house to be brave as he dies. Lovely.

In the end they did cancel the play and did something else, and we were thanked by a couple of other class parents who were sick of war war war for the 5th grade plays and felt it was tasteless anyway. When our second son got to 5th grade we went in and quietly warned the new class teacher that we wouldn’t be putting up with a repetition and right away he said “Oh, don’t worry - I know all about that and you needn’t worry, we are not touching the war at all.” So lessons seem to have been learned temporarily at least. The actual staff involved were wonderful, listened and learned and were ultimately very respectful.

In JHS second grade history the textbook has two double page spreads of photos and captions about WWII and that’s it. The first part is about the invasion of Manchuria by Japan but it’s captioned as something along the lines of “For trade purposes, Japan needed to establish a foothold in China” and there are photos of anti-Japanese propaganda, but it stops long short of calling it an invasion. Maybe one side of the first spread is about that period of the war, then the other side is various small maps and photos of the entire rest of the war and most of the final double page spread is, yawn, atomic bombs.

This time we didn’t even attempt to go to the school - the JHS system is utterly rigid and inflexible and they don’t give a shit what the parents think - you suck it up and endure. So we just put more time into directing our kid to various sites from the US, UK and Europe as well as Japan so that he could read for himself. He said it was fascinating to read the same incidents again and again from all the different points of view. I suppose this only works well if you can read Japanese and English and have a grandfather who translated lots of German stuff for him, too.

This got very long, sorry!

On the whole though, general ignorance about history is rife. Most people have little to no idea what went on where, in world history in general. But that’s probably true of many people in the UK and the USA, too…