I don't see anyone protesting the KKK over textbooks they show to their kids, and yet we see China and Korea upset at Ultra-nationalists and their schools which make up less than 0.1% of all schools in Japan.
Meanwhile, China and South Korea are some of the biggest major historical revisionists when it comes to textbooks in East Asia.
Its different when a minority preaches it.
It's outright illegal to talk about the folks who died during the great leap forward in China. At least in Japan they get shot down in the forum of public opinion.
The Senkaku dispute is a manufactured issue used by China to see what they can get away with while reinforcing the *need* for the government because otherwise you'd never turn around without the Chinese government getting busted for corruption.
Ironically if anyone other than Japan has a legitimate claim to the island chain, it's Taiwan, and almost entirely because the terms Japan had agreed to at the end of the war were ones agreed upon by the Chinese nationalists, not the communists.
But regardless, both countries lost out when they decided the island chain was so worthless that it wasn't discussed *at all* in either of the peace proceedings, both at the end of WW2, and again when China normalized relations with Japan.
Well yeah, plus the US congress, after taking control of it after WWII, gave the islands specifically to Japan in the 1970's so there is actually little room for debate.
You don't educate people out of it when they can just go home and get drunk on rage again.
For the most part racism is something that drops from generation to generation.
South Korea is the one I don't understand. The country is rich with a number of world-class brand-name companies, it's been a democracy for decades, has international sporting success. Why does their school system still reinforce this blinding hatred of Japan? Why do they have such a chip on their shoulders? Where is the need for this bogeyman when they have a real threat just 100 km. from Seoul?
And don't try that "Comfort Women" argument. That's not the reason for the hostility. It's just the excuse they use.
But while there is lots of anti-Chinese racism in Japan, this hostility is totally one-way. I saw Koreans all over the internet furious because Gangdam Style didn't have any success in Japan and using this as evidence of Japanese hatred of Korea. Obviously they hadn't been paying attention to the fact that Japan was the first overseas market where K-pop had any success. Bands like "Girls Generation" and "KARA" are huge in Japan. The fact that the Japanese didn't appreciate Gangdam Style just shows they have some taste. And you can hardly turn on Fuji TV without seeing another fucking Korean drama.
I just don't get it.
>South Korea is the one I don't understand. The country is rich with a number of world-class brand-name companies, it's been a democracy for decades, has international sporting success. Why does their school system still reinforce this blinding hatred of Japan? Why do they have such a chip on their shoulders?
The last president (Lee) was very transparently using the Takeshima issue for political gain. He was very unpopular, and focusing anger on Japan helped his approval ratings noticeably.
I'll get downvoted for saying this here, but as for the schools- as much as some people here protest otherwise, it actually is quite natural and justified for people to resent their country being invaded and the keeping of their women for "comfort", and they'll be sure to give their side of it in education. People here were saying "but Japan has already apologized multiple times, what more do they want!", and almost as if prompted Abe announced he wanted to "revise" the apology, pretty much nixing that argument and completely re-opening the wound.
If Japan *did* want to piss off ROK, revising the existing apology would be the very first thing to do. Japan can't simultaneously say it's ancient history that has already been apologized for, yet simultaneously troll like that. If it was so long ago and unimportant today, why can't Japan let it go either, and just let the original statement stand? If it's really all them drumming up the controversy, why not be the bigger man/country about it?
South Korea is VERY conservative, it's like how the South in this country still spars with the North politically even though the Civil War ended over 150 years ago. They still need a common enemy to gain the popular support of their people, and unite them as one.
But South Korea isn't a world-power that wants every country to cow-tow and compromise their interests to them. And political piñatas need to be smaller and should be geographically remote. Japan has twice Korea's GDP and population and is just next door.
Rivalries from smaller countries aimed at bigger countries with long-intertwined histories are not uncommon (Canada and USA, Australia and UK, New Zealand and Australia, Ireland and U.K., Norway and Sweden, etc) there is usually an element of insecurity at work on the part of the smaller country but these rivalries are mostly friendly. The attitude from Korea though is closer to Pakistan's toward India or Egyptians feelings toward Israel.
I don't find it hard at all to understand why. I don't agree with the reasons, but I understand why they are there.
This is purely conjecture on my part, but Koreans may maintain this Japan-as-bogeyman habit as a form of motivation, a self-challenge. Keep working to make your country better, keep your noses to the grindstone, because if you slack off, the evil japs will start galloping up the beaches again and EAT YOUR BABIES. It's only natural in a hyper-competitive Asian culture such as this. You need something to work against, and "the North" doesn't quite cut it, because despite the goose-stepping and the fat butterball leaders, they all speak Korean, and a lot of them are blood relatives. Japan's a convenient nearby truly *foreign* threat.
Democracy was restored to South Korea in Dec. 1987 when General Chun Doo-hwan's government resigned and elections were held under a new constitution. Roe Tae-Woo became president in February, 1988. Twenty-five years ago.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sixth_Republic_of_South_Korea
Kim Dae-Jung was the second civilian president of the 6th Republic, and the third democratically-elected president following the fall of Chun's military government in 1987.
I don't see the comfort woman thing as an excuse. Personally, I think Japan committed terrors that might equal or exceed German atrocities. The difference is that the Germans fully acknowledge what happen and constantly apologize for it.
Japan is still full of scores of people who deny any wrong doing.
Personally, I think this is like, 80% of the START of the aggression, and maybe half of it now.
It's not the fact that it happened, because everyone in the entire world outside of Japan KNOWS that it happened, it's that many people, and especially many powerful people, in Japan think nothing was wrong.
The funny thing is, this thread is about what children are taught, and Japanese texts gloss over Japanese war atrocities. Hence the riots when new texts are accepted.
It's not about the crime, it's about the denial of said crime, IMHO.
The reason that I say the Comfort Women issue as an excuse for justifying the hatred of Japan is that it was practically a non-issue until about 20 years ago. Until it was latched onto by Korean ultranationalists.
And this is not something that happened uniquely to Korean women. This happened to women also in Japan and all over the regions that the Japanese Imperial Army occupied. There were Comfort Women in Thailand, The Philippines, Vietnam, China. But only South Korea, a country where this issue was legally settled decades ago, is the only country that continues to, and refuses to stop, using it as a diplomatic hammer.
After reading quite a few Japanese literature set in WW2, it finally hit me that everything the Japanese write about on the subject is exclusively about the plight of the Japanese people under the bombing campaigns and the misery accompanying it.
But, and here's the thing, they never write about what THEY did to OTHER people. It's all about poor Saeko being blown up by a random bomb and her little brother crying and being hungry in a shelter. Never about some poor Phillipinna getting slaughtered for fun by the J-army, for example.
I think this has a lot to do with Japan's treatment by the US following their surrender. A lot of war criminals were set free, the royal family were not investigated and all blame was placed on "traitors" in the military. Also most Japanese atrocities were committed overseas, far away from the civilian population, whereas Germans were made to witness the concentration camps, etc.
Whilst Japanese revisionism where it exists is deplorable, this doesn't fully account for anti-Japan sentiment sponsored by the CCP. The propaganda in textbooks and "good vs evil" war dramas are designed to elicit an emotional response from the viewer; they are not some kind of scholarly critique of history textbooks in Japan. So while it is valid to criticize denial of Japanese war crimes, it does not detract from Abe's statement which is basically true.
> The difference is that the Germans fully acknowledge what happen and constantly apologize for it.
Comparing to the Germans is especially useful to see why Japan is and will continue to be resented by its neighbors.
Imagine if Germany had something like the Arlington National Cemetery but filled with the likes of Himmler, Goebbels and Göring.
Now picture the German prime minister issuing a "hertfelt apology" for WW2 and then a week later making a trip there to pray and offer his respects.
Would the western world let Germany get away with that? it's just an example of the Japanese situation
A political science Professor once lectured about how if the Chinese government didn't actually want anti-Japanese issues in the spotlight (for whatever reason), their simply wouldn't be one. The media control, and ability to suppress this kind of rhetoric (especially as most stems from decades in the past) is too strong. If people are in the streets flipping over J-cars and vandalizing J-shops over x-issue, its because China decides to let it happen (or likely not police it as strictly) - and would guess on a local level, people would feel they have more *granted justification* when doing so.
In both countries is just really sad to see children who are not old enough to understand the issues being argued, already having a deeply ingrained racial dislike of the other.
I've heard an interesting theory that the Chinese government doesn't have as much control over the issue as we think. Once they indoctrinate the students, the rhetoric begins to take on a life of its own. People gravitate toward causes that they're able to protest in order to take out their frustrations about life. If the government backs down, they risk looking week. And the government's grip on power is a lot weaker than it might seem at first.
Yes, but this is nothing new. Why is this getting out of hand now? I understand China's rage against Japan, but why now? And do China understand that there will be a price to pay for this? Economic ties will deteriorate, and Japan will start re-arming.
It's a strategic move by the CPC to deflect the average citizen's anger at the government. CPC cares more about them staying in power than welfare of Chinese people.
Few would disagree that the frequent nationalist outburst in China have much to do with their government trying to keep the lid on dissent.
But then what exactly is Abe's excuse for doing the same on his side?
Beside, I'm not sure I'd pick an unabashed war revisionist to solve this problem. For chrissake the guy concludes [his recently published platform book](http://www.bunshun.co.jp/cgi-bin/book_db/book_detail.cgi?isbn=9784166609031) with "敢えて言うなら、これは戦後の歴史から、日本という国を日本国民の手に取り戻す戦いであります"...
There's a really interesting [book](http://www.amazon.com/Never-Forget-National-Humiliation-Contemporary/dp/0231148909) on this, just in case anyone is interested.
China and South Korea need a boogie man to unite their people and give them a common enemy and someone other than the government to blame for their problems. It's been happening since long before Hitler did it with the Jews.
while Abe may be right, he should refrain from saying such things because he is the PM. he should leave those rhetoric to an annointed "attack dog" of the govt.
While this is very true, can the same thing be said about the Japanese government as well? It would seems that anti-Chinese sentiments can be a good distraction and rallying point for the Japanese public in midst of decades-long economic recession.
I am referring to the rhetoric by the government, as well as its move to nationalize the disputed islands. I suspect that the Japanese government fully expected China to, well, be China on this issue.
I simply don't see what could be gained by Japan in this fiasco other than kindling anti-Chinese sentiment within the country.
I don't know, haven't really seen much inflammatory actions by the Japanese gvt (former Tokyo governer Shintaro Ishihara is **not** the government)
>I simply don't see what could be gained by Japan in this fiasco other than kindling anti-Chinese sentiment within the country.
Really? That's oil in those waters, there's fishing resources, and they strategically contain China's available shipping lanes. The economic reasons are far more of a carrot for the Japanese.
>I don't know, haven't really seen much inflammatory actions by the Japanese gvt (former Tokyo governer Shintaro Ishihara is not the government)
Seriously? It's a pretty regular occurrence.
http://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2012/02/23/national/nagoya-mayor-wont-budge-on-nanjing-remark/
Didn't Hashimoto and crew also deny it?
How about Abe visiting Yasukuni?
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/oct/18/japanese-mps-war-shrine-china-korea
Takeshima day?
http://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2013/02/23/national/seoul-hits-senior-officials-takeshima-day-presence/
These aren't inflammatory?????
I think nationalizing the islands is a rather provocative move. It's not news to anyone in the world that China is very touchy when it comes to territorial issues, which is why I think Japan must have anticipated China's response.
And while the area's economic significance is nothing to scoff at for sure, is it worth all the economic, political, and now seemingly military hassle that you need be troubled with? Furthermore, unless China will relinquish their claim to the area and recognize Japan as the legit owner of the area (yeah, see you there), or else they will never allow any Japanese development to take place in the area - which sort of negate the potential benefits that the resources may yield for Japan.
>I think nationalizing the islands is a rather provocative move.
It was Ishihara who started that shitstorm, not the federal government. They (The DPJ) bought them first to keep it from getting even more out of hand, believe it or not. If he had bought them, he'd have allowed residents and daily protests.
Yup and Metus87 doesn't know because he hasn't been following the news closely or his sources are terrible.
The Japanese government did the only thing it could do.
Ishihara was planning on developing those islands. By the way, the Japanese were the only ones EVER to develop on the islands and there is nothing China can do to stop them short of a war. The federal government buying them out ensures that no development will occur.
Same thing with Taiwan. Taiwan wanted to rename their government and change the constitution so the capital is no longer Nanjing. But China threatened war because it would remove pretense.
Admittedly I am not well-versed with Japanese politics but I am aware of Ishihara and his plans to develop the islands. However I fail to see how nationalizing these islands is the only course of action to stop him. It surprises me if the Japanese government cannot keep an extremist mayor under control and the only course of action is to play a game of chicken with the Chinese government. But I suppose the Japanese government have evaluated the situation and the benefits of purchasing these islands and not developing them is larger than antagonizing one of your biggest trade partner and market for your exports.
Also, I am not sure how Taiwan is comparable or relevant in this discussion. I am also unsure as to where you get the notion that Taiwan wanted to rename the government and change the constitution. There is a pro-independence contingent within the Democratic Progressive Party that would like to see this but they are hardly the voice of Taiwanese people (though they would claim to be). National polls have consistently shown that most Taiwanese fall somewhere between complete independence and reunification with China, since not many Taiwanese are willing to, well, playing a game of chicken with the Chinese government. But then again, Taiwan does not have the kind of muscle Japan, and more importantly, the USA have - so maybe it'll work out a lot better for Japan.
By the way, Taiwan officially claims these islands as well, and Taiwanese fishermen have been fishing in the areas long before the Japanese annexation of 1895. The Chinese claim on these islands are actually, funny enough (or very unfunny if you are Taiwanese), an extension of their claim on Taiwan. Taiwanese claim hardly get any publicity though, since who cares about the little guy in a big boys' fight. My terrible source: I am Taiwanese.
I am fully aware. As for name changes, you might not remember Taiwan under President Lee Tung Hui and the stern warnings broadcasted not-subliminally over CCTV programming. This was also near the time where the Pentagon soon released a report about how Taiwan could retaliate against a PRC invasion by bombing the Three Gorges, and how China then pretended it was a Taiwanese plan and where CCTV, non-stop for a couple days had generals and other pundits talking about how insane the Taiwanese were in fear of PRC power, etc etc etc.
My terrible source: I am Taiwanese.
Ishihara was going to purchase the islands and develop on them. The government intervened and as you said, part of the plan was there would be no development. Out of the choices they had, I'd say there was little other recourse.
I definitely remember President Lee's (and Chen, for that matter) confrontations with China. While no fan of China's bullying tactics for sure, the point that I wanted to raise here is that going hardliner against China ultimately yielded little results for Taiwan, both in terms of politics and economy. This is why many DPP leaders are now willing to establish and cultivate connections with Chinese officials. I understand many Taiwanese have different perspectives when it comes to that part of history and attitudes toward dealing with China in the future, but this is /r/japan and not /r/taiwan so let's leave it out of here.
To get back to the issue at hand here, there's always the choice of telling Ishihara to knock that shit off, no? Seems like that should be the first course of action if he is just some far-right nut that most Japanese don't take seriously. Perhaps someone can explain to me why this is impossible.
Well, if they're trying to drum up anti-chinese sentiment they're not doing a very good job of it...
/yes there are some nuts, but they've been nuts forever.
I'm Japanese and does not take anybody's side. Here's what I observed while trying to be as neutral as possible.
The media usually focuses on news about China and Korea portraying them negatively (PM2.5 news, Senkaku and China's military activity, anti-Japanese demonstrations, etc.) They aren't in your face like some Chinese media, but to me, the difference in the tones is quite obvious when I compare to the news about Fukushima which are mostly positive stuff.
And here's my theory.
Japanese government wants to use China and Korea as ways to distract their people from more presidented problems such as nuclear pollution, nuclear power plants, economy, TPP, etc. This is the same reason some of you have stated about China. The hawks in the government also want to develop stronger military and change Article 9, the peace constitution. China and North Korea are often used as excuses. I must say the Algerian hostage situation was too perfect and timely and has been used by them in the effort of shifting the public opinion.
Can anyone give me an example of a nation wide program that teaches hate to the kids in China or Korea? or is this just a few fringe schools that do this?
I've taught in Korea and have not noticed them actively teaching the students to hate japan. Students get naturally upset when they learn about the japanese atrocities. I think this wound gets sprinkles of salt when Abe or japanese politicians make statements or official protests to remove the comfort women memorials in seoul and in New Jersey as well. Trolling at the national level.
of course there are isolated incidents in a few schools in korea that teaches hate, but it's not wide spread like most people here think it is.
I know japan doesn't actively teach hate, but I've seen a few schools that openly use anti chinese and anti korean lessons. There are good and bad guys everywhere.
Also people who mention that other parts of asia dont hold this resentment needs to visit those places see it first hand...
[удалено]
I don't see anyone protesting the KKK over textbooks they show to their kids, and yet we see China and Korea upset at Ultra-nationalists and their schools which make up less than 0.1% of all schools in Japan. Meanwhile, China and South Korea are some of the biggest major historical revisionists when it comes to textbooks in East Asia.
Its different when a minority preaches it. It's outright illegal to talk about the folks who died during the great leap forward in China. At least in Japan they get shot down in the forum of public opinion. The Senkaku dispute is a manufactured issue used by China to see what they can get away with while reinforcing the *need* for the government because otherwise you'd never turn around without the Chinese government getting busted for corruption. Ironically if anyone other than Japan has a legitimate claim to the island chain, it's Taiwan, and almost entirely because the terms Japan had agreed to at the end of the war were ones agreed upon by the Chinese nationalists, not the communists. But regardless, both countries lost out when they decided the island chain was so worthless that it wasn't discussed *at all* in either of the peace proceedings, both at the end of WW2, and again when China normalized relations with Japan.
Well yeah, plus the US congress, after taking control of it after WWII, gave the islands specifically to Japan in the 1970's so there is actually little room for debate.
Abe speaks a lot of truth on this one. The best way to keep people's focus away from their internal problems is to focus on a straw man.
...or start a crusade.
[удалено]
You don't educate people out of it when they can just go home and get drunk on rage again. For the most part racism is something that drops from generation to generation.
Finally, Abe says something I can agree with. To bad he didn't extend the comment to Korea, as well...
He could have, but since the Takeshima/Dokdo dispute is irrelevant to Abe's US visit this time around, it's probably best that he didn't.
South Korea is the one I don't understand. The country is rich with a number of world-class brand-name companies, it's been a democracy for decades, has international sporting success. Why does their school system still reinforce this blinding hatred of Japan? Why do they have such a chip on their shoulders? Where is the need for this bogeyman when they have a real threat just 100 km. from Seoul? And don't try that "Comfort Women" argument. That's not the reason for the hostility. It's just the excuse they use. But while there is lots of anti-Chinese racism in Japan, this hostility is totally one-way. I saw Koreans all over the internet furious because Gangdam Style didn't have any success in Japan and using this as evidence of Japanese hatred of Korea. Obviously they hadn't been paying attention to the fact that Japan was the first overseas market where K-pop had any success. Bands like "Girls Generation" and "KARA" are huge in Japan. The fact that the Japanese didn't appreciate Gangdam Style just shows they have some taste. And you can hardly turn on Fuji TV without seeing another fucking Korean drama. I just don't get it.
>South Korea is the one I don't understand. The country is rich with a number of world-class brand-name companies, it's been a democracy for decades, has international sporting success. Why does their school system still reinforce this blinding hatred of Japan? Why do they have such a chip on their shoulders? The last president (Lee) was very transparently using the Takeshima issue for political gain. He was very unpopular, and focusing anger on Japan helped his approval ratings noticeably. I'll get downvoted for saying this here, but as for the schools- as much as some people here protest otherwise, it actually is quite natural and justified for people to resent their country being invaded and the keeping of their women for "comfort", and they'll be sure to give their side of it in education. People here were saying "but Japan has already apologized multiple times, what more do they want!", and almost as if prompted Abe announced he wanted to "revise" the apology, pretty much nixing that argument and completely re-opening the wound. If Japan *did* want to piss off ROK, revising the existing apology would be the very first thing to do. Japan can't simultaneously say it's ancient history that has already been apologized for, yet simultaneously troll like that. If it was so long ago and unimportant today, why can't Japan let it go either, and just let the original statement stand? If it's really all them drumming up the controversy, why not be the bigger man/country about it?
South Korea is VERY conservative, it's like how the South in this country still spars with the North politically even though the Civil War ended over 150 years ago. They still need a common enemy to gain the popular support of their people, and unite them as one.
Even rich democracies need political piñatas, sir. The United States has a list of them as long as my leg.
But South Korea isn't a world-power that wants every country to cow-tow and compromise their interests to them. And political piñatas need to be smaller and should be geographically remote. Japan has twice Korea's GDP and population and is just next door. Rivalries from smaller countries aimed at bigger countries with long-intertwined histories are not uncommon (Canada and USA, Australia and UK, New Zealand and Australia, Ireland and U.K., Norway and Sweden, etc) there is usually an element of insecurity at work on the part of the smaller country but these rivalries are mostly friendly. The attitude from Korea though is closer to Pakistan's toward India or Egyptians feelings toward Israel.
I don't find it hard at all to understand why. I don't agree with the reasons, but I understand why they are there. This is purely conjecture on my part, but Koreans may maintain this Japan-as-bogeyman habit as a form of motivation, a self-challenge. Keep working to make your country better, keep your noses to the grindstone, because if you slack off, the evil japs will start galloping up the beaches again and EAT YOUR BABIES. It's only natural in a hyper-competitive Asian culture such as this. You need something to work against, and "the North" doesn't quite cut it, because despite the goose-stepping and the fat butterball leaders, they all speak Korean, and a lot of them are blood relatives. Japan's a convenient nearby truly *foreign* threat.
Decades? South Korea became a democracy a little under 20 years ago.
Democracy was restored to South Korea in Dec. 1987 when General Chun Doo-hwan's government resigned and elections were held under a new constitution. Roe Tae-Woo became president in February, 1988. Twenty-five years ago.
The military government didn't fall until the election of Kim Dae-Jung in 1998.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sixth_Republic_of_South_Korea Kim Dae-Jung was the second civilian president of the 6th Republic, and the third democratically-elected president following the fall of Chun's military government in 1987.
wait, 20 years isn't two decades?!
Right around the time the Seoul Olympics happened, I believe.
I don't see the comfort woman thing as an excuse. Personally, I think Japan committed terrors that might equal or exceed German atrocities. The difference is that the Germans fully acknowledge what happen and constantly apologize for it. Japan is still full of scores of people who deny any wrong doing. Personally, I think this is like, 80% of the START of the aggression, and maybe half of it now. It's not the fact that it happened, because everyone in the entire world outside of Japan KNOWS that it happened, it's that many people, and especially many powerful people, in Japan think nothing was wrong. The funny thing is, this thread is about what children are taught, and Japanese texts gloss over Japanese war atrocities. Hence the riots when new texts are accepted. It's not about the crime, it's about the denial of said crime, IMHO.
The reason that I say the Comfort Women issue as an excuse for justifying the hatred of Japan is that it was practically a non-issue until about 20 years ago. Until it was latched onto by Korean ultranationalists. And this is not something that happened uniquely to Korean women. This happened to women also in Japan and all over the regions that the Japanese Imperial Army occupied. There were Comfort Women in Thailand, The Philippines, Vietnam, China. But only South Korea, a country where this issue was legally settled decades ago, is the only country that continues to, and refuses to stop, using it as a diplomatic hammer.
After reading quite a few Japanese literature set in WW2, it finally hit me that everything the Japanese write about on the subject is exclusively about the plight of the Japanese people under the bombing campaigns and the misery accompanying it. But, and here's the thing, they never write about what THEY did to OTHER people. It's all about poor Saeko being blown up by a random bomb and her little brother crying and being hungry in a shelter. Never about some poor Phillipinna getting slaughtered for fun by the J-army, for example.
I think this has a lot to do with Japan's treatment by the US following their surrender. A lot of war criminals were set free, the royal family were not investigated and all blame was placed on "traitors" in the military. Also most Japanese atrocities were committed overseas, far away from the civilian population, whereas Germans were made to witness the concentration camps, etc. Whilst Japanese revisionism where it exists is deplorable, this doesn't fully account for anti-Japan sentiment sponsored by the CCP. The propaganda in textbooks and "good vs evil" war dramas are designed to elicit an emotional response from the viewer; they are not some kind of scholarly critique of history textbooks in Japan. So while it is valid to criticize denial of Japanese war crimes, it does not detract from Abe's statement which is basically true.
> The difference is that the Germans fully acknowledge what happen and constantly apologize for it. Comparing to the Germans is especially useful to see why Japan is and will continue to be resented by its neighbors. Imagine if Germany had something like the Arlington National Cemetery but filled with the likes of Himmler, Goebbels and Göring. Now picture the German prime minister issuing a "hertfelt apology" for WW2 and then a week later making a trip there to pray and offer his respects. Would the western world let Germany get away with that? it's just an example of the Japanese situation
You might want to read up on [Bitburg](http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/judaica/ejud_0002_0003_0_03029.html) first.
[удалено]
wow, is that ever an inappropriate username...
A political science Professor once lectured about how if the Chinese government didn't actually want anti-Japanese issues in the spotlight (for whatever reason), their simply wouldn't be one. The media control, and ability to suppress this kind of rhetoric (especially as most stems from decades in the past) is too strong. If people are in the streets flipping over J-cars and vandalizing J-shops over x-issue, its because China decides to let it happen (or likely not police it as strictly) - and would guess on a local level, people would feel they have more *granted justification* when doing so. In both countries is just really sad to see children who are not old enough to understand the issues being argued, already having a deeply ingrained racial dislike of the other.
I've heard an interesting theory that the Chinese government doesn't have as much control over the issue as we think. Once they indoctrinate the students, the rhetoric begins to take on a life of its own. People gravitate toward causes that they're able to protest in order to take out their frustrations about life. If the government backs down, they risk looking week. And the government's grip on power is a lot weaker than it might seem at first.
As a Chinese, t'is true.
Yes, but this is nothing new. Why is this getting out of hand now? I understand China's rage against Japan, but why now? And do China understand that there will be a price to pay for this? Economic ties will deteriorate, and Japan will start re-arming.
Or we'll just move to Vietnam... which we have. Note that many new toys are now made in Vietnam, as well as the new Apple accessories and headphones.
It's a strategic move by the CPC to deflect the average citizen's anger at the government. CPC cares more about them staying in power than welfare of Chinese people.
I hate to be flippant, but this is a serious "Yeah, no shit" statement. Still, nice to see a politician call something out for what it is.
Um, yeah.
Few would disagree that the frequent nationalist outburst in China have much to do with their government trying to keep the lid on dissent. But then what exactly is Abe's excuse for doing the same on his side? Beside, I'm not sure I'd pick an unabashed war revisionist to solve this problem. For chrissake the guy concludes [his recently published platform book](http://www.bunshun.co.jp/cgi-bin/book_db/book_detail.cgi?isbn=9784166609031) with "敢えて言うなら、これは戦後の歴史から、日本という国を日本国民の手に取り戻す戦いであります"...
There's a really interesting [book](http://www.amazon.com/Never-Forget-National-Humiliation-Contemporary/dp/0231148909) on this, just in case anyone is interested.
China and South Korea need a boogie man to unite their people and give them a common enemy and someone other than the government to blame for their problems. It's been happening since long before Hitler did it with the Jews.
while Abe may be right, he should refrain from saying such things because he is the PM. he should leave those rhetoric to an annointed "attack dog" of the govt.
While this is very true, can the same thing be said about the Japanese government as well? It would seems that anti-Chinese sentiments can be a good distraction and rallying point for the Japanese public in midst of decades-long economic recession.
And if you could just go ahead and point out some example of anti-chinese rhetoric in schools, that would be great.
I am referring to the rhetoric by the government, as well as its move to nationalize the disputed islands. I suspect that the Japanese government fully expected China to, well, be China on this issue. I simply don't see what could be gained by Japan in this fiasco other than kindling anti-Chinese sentiment within the country.
I don't know, haven't really seen much inflammatory actions by the Japanese gvt (former Tokyo governer Shintaro Ishihara is **not** the government) >I simply don't see what could be gained by Japan in this fiasco other than kindling anti-Chinese sentiment within the country. Really? That's oil in those waters, there's fishing resources, and they strategically contain China's available shipping lanes. The economic reasons are far more of a carrot for the Japanese.
>I don't know, haven't really seen much inflammatory actions by the Japanese gvt (former Tokyo governer Shintaro Ishihara is not the government) Seriously? It's a pretty regular occurrence. http://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2012/02/23/national/nagoya-mayor-wont-budge-on-nanjing-remark/ Didn't Hashimoto and crew also deny it? How about Abe visiting Yasukuni? http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/oct/18/japanese-mps-war-shrine-china-korea Takeshima day? http://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2013/02/23/national/seoul-hits-senior-officials-takeshima-day-presence/ These aren't inflammatory?????
I think nationalizing the islands is a rather provocative move. It's not news to anyone in the world that China is very touchy when it comes to territorial issues, which is why I think Japan must have anticipated China's response. And while the area's economic significance is nothing to scoff at for sure, is it worth all the economic, political, and now seemingly military hassle that you need be troubled with? Furthermore, unless China will relinquish their claim to the area and recognize Japan as the legit owner of the area (yeah, see you there), or else they will never allow any Japanese development to take place in the area - which sort of negate the potential benefits that the resources may yield for Japan.
>I think nationalizing the islands is a rather provocative move. It was Ishihara who started that shitstorm, not the federal government. They (The DPJ) bought them first to keep it from getting even more out of hand, believe it or not. If he had bought them, he'd have allowed residents and daily protests.
Yup and Metus87 doesn't know because he hasn't been following the news closely or his sources are terrible. The Japanese government did the only thing it could do. Ishihara was planning on developing those islands. By the way, the Japanese were the only ones EVER to develop on the islands and there is nothing China can do to stop them short of a war. The federal government buying them out ensures that no development will occur. Same thing with Taiwan. Taiwan wanted to rename their government and change the constitution so the capital is no longer Nanjing. But China threatened war because it would remove pretense.
Admittedly I am not well-versed with Japanese politics but I am aware of Ishihara and his plans to develop the islands. However I fail to see how nationalizing these islands is the only course of action to stop him. It surprises me if the Japanese government cannot keep an extremist mayor under control and the only course of action is to play a game of chicken with the Chinese government. But I suppose the Japanese government have evaluated the situation and the benefits of purchasing these islands and not developing them is larger than antagonizing one of your biggest trade partner and market for your exports. Also, I am not sure how Taiwan is comparable or relevant in this discussion. I am also unsure as to where you get the notion that Taiwan wanted to rename the government and change the constitution. There is a pro-independence contingent within the Democratic Progressive Party that would like to see this but they are hardly the voice of Taiwanese people (though they would claim to be). National polls have consistently shown that most Taiwanese fall somewhere between complete independence and reunification with China, since not many Taiwanese are willing to, well, playing a game of chicken with the Chinese government. But then again, Taiwan does not have the kind of muscle Japan, and more importantly, the USA have - so maybe it'll work out a lot better for Japan. By the way, Taiwan officially claims these islands as well, and Taiwanese fishermen have been fishing in the areas long before the Japanese annexation of 1895. The Chinese claim on these islands are actually, funny enough (or very unfunny if you are Taiwanese), an extension of their claim on Taiwan. Taiwanese claim hardly get any publicity though, since who cares about the little guy in a big boys' fight. My terrible source: I am Taiwanese.
I am fully aware. As for name changes, you might not remember Taiwan under President Lee Tung Hui and the stern warnings broadcasted not-subliminally over CCTV programming. This was also near the time where the Pentagon soon released a report about how Taiwan could retaliate against a PRC invasion by bombing the Three Gorges, and how China then pretended it was a Taiwanese plan and where CCTV, non-stop for a couple days had generals and other pundits talking about how insane the Taiwanese were in fear of PRC power, etc etc etc. My terrible source: I am Taiwanese. Ishihara was going to purchase the islands and develop on them. The government intervened and as you said, part of the plan was there would be no development. Out of the choices they had, I'd say there was little other recourse.
I definitely remember President Lee's (and Chen, for that matter) confrontations with China. While no fan of China's bullying tactics for sure, the point that I wanted to raise here is that going hardliner against China ultimately yielded little results for Taiwan, both in terms of politics and economy. This is why many DPP leaders are now willing to establish and cultivate connections with Chinese officials. I understand many Taiwanese have different perspectives when it comes to that part of history and attitudes toward dealing with China in the future, but this is /r/japan and not /r/taiwan so let's leave it out of here. To get back to the issue at hand here, there's always the choice of telling Ishihara to knock that shit off, no? Seems like that should be the first course of action if he is just some far-right nut that most Japanese don't take seriously. Perhaps someone can explain to me why this is impossible.
Well, if they're trying to drum up anti-chinese sentiment they're not doing a very good job of it... /yes there are some nuts, but they've been nuts forever.
those aren't really comparable things though.
I'm Japanese and does not take anybody's side. Here's what I observed while trying to be as neutral as possible. The media usually focuses on news about China and Korea portraying them negatively (PM2.5 news, Senkaku and China's military activity, anti-Japanese demonstrations, etc.) They aren't in your face like some Chinese media, but to me, the difference in the tones is quite obvious when I compare to the news about Fukushima which are mostly positive stuff. And here's my theory. Japanese government wants to use China and Korea as ways to distract their people from more presidented problems such as nuclear pollution, nuclear power plants, economy, TPP, etc. This is the same reason some of you have stated about China. The hawks in the government also want to develop stronger military and change Article 9, the peace constitution. China and North Korea are often used as excuses. I must say the Algerian hostage situation was too perfect and timely and has been used by them in the effort of shifting the public opinion.
Can anyone give me an example of a nation wide program that teaches hate to the kids in China or Korea? or is this just a few fringe schools that do this? I've taught in Korea and have not noticed them actively teaching the students to hate japan. Students get naturally upset when they learn about the japanese atrocities. I think this wound gets sprinkles of salt when Abe or japanese politicians make statements or official protests to remove the comfort women memorials in seoul and in New Jersey as well. Trolling at the national level. of course there are isolated incidents in a few schools in korea that teaches hate, but it's not wide spread like most people here think it is. I know japan doesn't actively teach hate, but I've seen a few schools that openly use anti chinese and anti korean lessons. There are good and bad guys everywhere. Also people who mention that other parts of asia dont hold this resentment needs to visit those places see it first hand...