Türk porno yayini yapan http://www.smfairview.com ve http://www.idoproxy.com adli siteler rokettube videolarini da HD kalitede yayinlayacagini acikladi. Ayrica porno indir ozelligiyle de http://www.mysticinca.com adli porno sitesi devreye girdi.
Page 6 of 6 FirstFirst 123456
Results 76 to 84 of 84

Thread: Japanese Revisionism: Latest episode

  1. #76
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    9,266

    Default Re: Japanese Revisionism: Latest episode

    Quote Originally Posted by Tenshinai View Post
    Thats strange, i could swear i´ve heard words to that effect from at least 3 different Japanese prime ministers... Oh wait, "responsibility"? Right...
    Those equivocal and often self-pitying 'apologies' rank with Hirohito's equally evasive refusal to face facts, and to avoid loss of face, with his ludicrous "the war has developed not necessarily to Japan's advantage" comment in his surrender speech.

    Japanese apologies

    Wed, 17/02/2010 - 16:59 — Gerhard Krebs

    Yamazaki, Jane W. 2006. Japanese Apologies for World War II: A Rhetorical Study. London and New York: Routledge. xii, 196 pages, ISBN 0 415 35565 6

    The Japanese government turns a blind eye to the country's colonial and second world war misdeeds - so goes the oft-heard criticism that periodically creates tension throughout the Far East. Jane Yamazaki, however, challenges the view that Japan has never apologised for past crimes, and argues instead that the rest of the world has turned a deaf ear on repeated Japanese expressions of regret. In recent decades Tokyo has apologised several times in different ways ranging from merely making excuses to expressing sincere regret. The problem often lies in language, since Japanese can be difficult to translate or leave a lot of room for interpretation. Yamazaki, therefore, not only details the history of Japan's multiple apologies; concentrating on the years between 1984 and 1995, she also analyses their rhetoric and translates different expressions.


    From ‘hansei' to ‘chinsha': how to say ‘sorry'

    Yamazaki begins her chronology of Japanese apologies with the 1965 normalisation of relations with South Korea, when Foreign Minister Shiina Etsusaburô expressed ‘true regret' (‘makoto ni ikan') and ‘deep remorse' (‘fukaku hansei') over an ‘unfortunate period in our countries' history'. Japan later used the same term in a joint communiqué when it normalised relations with China in 1972: ‘The Japanese side is keenly conscious of the responsibility for the serious damage that Japan caused in the past to the Chinese people through war, and deeply reproaches itself [fukaku hansei]'. ‘Hansei' (‘remorse', ‘reflection') is actually a weak expression of apology. Even softer was Emperor Hirohito's reference to Japan's treatment of China during the second world war while visiting President Ford in 1975: ‘The peoples of both countries...endured a brief, unfortunate ordeal as storms raged in the usually quiet Pacific'. Three years later, when Chinese Vice Premier Deng Xiao Ping visited Japan, Hirohito referred to the past by merely saying, ‘At one time, there were unfortunate events between our countries'.

    In 1982 a controversy erupted over alleged revisions of Japanese history in school textbooks. Following what was perceived by many as Japan's less than diplomatic handling of the situation, violent reactions occurred in China and South Korea. The rising tensions induced Japanese politicians to apologise more clearly, though they still used the rather lightweight ‘hansei'. In 1985, for example, on the United Nations' 40th anniversary, Prime Minister Nakasone Yasuhiro declared, ‘Since the end of the war, Japan has profoundly regretted [kibishiku hansei] the unleashing of rampant ultra nationalism and militarism and the war that brought great devastation to the people of many countries around the world and to our country as well'. While regretting past wrongs, Yasuhiro stressed that Japan had suffered, too, a tactic repeated by other politicians.

    The stronger ‘owabi' (‘apology') was first expressed in 1990, by Prime Minister Kaifu Toshiki to South Korean President Roh, and has been used regularly since: ‘...the people of the Korean peninsula experienced unbearable grief and suffering because of actions of our country...[we/I] are humbly remorseful [hansei] on this and wish to note our frank feelings of apology [owabi]'. Simultaneously, however, Japan stubbornly denied maintaining second world war ‘comfort stations' with forced prostitutes, most of them Korean. Cornered by Japanese historians, Cabinet Secretary Katô Kôichi publicly apologised to the ‘victims' (‘higaisha') in January 1992. Visiting Korea the same month, Prime Minister Miyazawa Kiichi even called Japan the ‘aggressor/perpetrator' (‘kagaisha').

    Prime Minister Hosokawa Morihiro's August 1993 apology resembled Kaifu's in 1990, but with one addition that other politicians later reiterated several times: that Japan ‘will demonstrate a new determination by contributing more than ever before to world peace'. Hosokawa's cabinet included three ministers of the Socialist Party, which had been calling for reconciliation with other Asian peoples and ‘sincere Japanese apologies to achieve that goal'. In Korea in November 1993, Hosokawa ‘apologised from the heart' (‘chinsha') for ‘Japan's past colonial rule', calling his country the aggressor/perpetrator (‘kagaisha'). The Japanese public approved of his mention of ‘aggression' and ‘colonial rule', but conservatives bristled. Having gone beyond what fellow party members and his coalition government were willing to admit, Hosokawa was at times forced to backtrack. Nevertheless, the next Prime Minister, Hata Tsutomu, uttered almost the same words in a May 1994 Diet speech.
    In August 1995, as the 50th anniversary of the second world war's end approached, the Socialist Murayama Tomiichi led a coalition government that included his long-time enemy, the conservative LDP. A known pacifist and advocate of non-alignment, neutrality and a closer relationship with Asian nations, Murayama apologised no differently than Kaifu, Miyazawa or Hosokawa had, yet the world took him much more seriously. Ironically, his stature as an apology advocate undermined his own government's recognition of his apology: after a long debate and vociferous right wing pressure, the resulting Diet resolution was so watered down that the word ‘apology' didn't even appear. This reinforced the outside world's impression that Japan had never apologised at all. Later prime ministers, all of them conservative, restated Murayama's apology almost verbatim.


    The politics of apologia: Why say sorry?

    Other nations also hate to apologise for wrongdoings, the author writes, and cites as an example the long overdue American apology to Japanese-Americans for their internment during the second world war. She finds American and British apologies are typically selective and ignore broader cases such as slavery, the use of napalm in Vietnam or the British Opium War. Indeed, when France passed a law, in February 2005, requiring history education in schools and universities to emphasise the ‘positive role' of the French colonial presence on other continents, it spurred harsh criticism by the French left and vehement protests in the countries concerned, above all in Algeria and the Antilles.

    As for Japan, Yamazaki admits that its apologies are sometimes expressed only in a general way concerning warfare, aggression, war atrocities or colonial rule, but she also provides several examples of apology for specific violent events or practices, such as the Nanking massacre, biochemical warfare, sexual slavery, and mistreatment of allied soldiers and civilians. Japan's reasons for apologising, according to Yamazaki, are several: to repair relations with Asian countries; to stimulate national self-reflection and a learning process leading to a new, improved identity; to affirm moral principles. She also cites the historian Yoshida Yutaka, who sees apologies and other conciliatory strategies as motivated by the Japanese ambition to assert leadership in Asia. But the domestic call for self-reflection is also motivated by opposition parties or new administrations who wish to criticise previous ones - most clearly demonstrated by Prime Minister Hosokawa in 1993.

    Japanese left-wing groups, unlike conservatives, are vehemently antimilitaristic and see the second world war as an instance of Japanese imperialism. Advocating closer ties with China, Korea and other Asian countries, they consistently demand a more remorseful stance and compensation for victims of Japanese aggression. The different political attitudes - conservative versus left-wing - are also reflected in the choice of expressions: ‘comfort women' versus ‘sex slaves', ‘Nanking incident' versus ‘Nanking massacre', ‘China Incident' versus ‘China War'. Yamazaki sees the conservative aversion to apology as an expression of a masochistic view of history and also of a fear that apologising would imply the Emperor's responsibility, if not culpability. But she neglects to sufficiently address conservatives' fear that admission of guilt would invite demands for compensation.
    Continued ....
    ..
    A rational army would run away.
    Montesquieu

  2. #77
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    9,266

    Default Re: Japanese Revisionism: Latest episode

    Appearing unrepentant

    The author believes that the South Korean government was ready to accept Japan's 1965 apology - its ‘hansei' on the occasion of normalising relations - but that the Korean public was not. The Chinese government's situation was similar, she says, but it later changed its attitude. Unfortunately, Yamazaki's study ends with the year 1995, after which the Chinese repeatedly campaigned to blame Japan for its alleged lack of sensibility. Other Asian countries believe Japan shouldn't feel guilty or apologise at all. Singapore, Thailand, Malaysia, Burma and Indonesia have taken a neutral attitude, holding that Japan should concentrate on present and future problems instead of wasting time and energy on historiographical reflection. They support the position of Japanese apologists, who claim that the second world war was fought for the liberation of Asia from white domination. Taiwan's reticence, meanwhile, probably reflects its ambivalence toward its former coloniser (1895-1945), close economic partner and ally in its campaign for recognition as the legitimate government of China, at least until Taipei lost that fight in 1972. Though the author herself admits that some Japanese apologies have been insufficient, her evidence that they have been expressed is convincing. But the period covered by Yamazaki's study ended over ten years ago. Since that time, regardless of any apologies expressed, Prime Minister Koizumi's numerous visits to the Yasukuni Shrine and the Ministry of Education's approval of controversial textbooks, (in 2001 and 2005), that present a ‘new view' of national history, have renewed a perception of Japan as unrepentant. Still, Yamazaki's book is a valuable response to the question of how Japan has dealt with its own history and of how the world has, or has not, responded.

    Gerhard Krebs Berlin Free University Krebs-Takeda@t-online.de
    http://www.newasiabooks.org/review/japanese-apologies-0
    ..
    A rational army would run away.
    Montesquieu

  3. #78
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    9,266

    Default Re: Japanese Revisionism: Latest episode

    So, when will USA aknowledge its genocide against the american natives?
    Possibly around the same time that Japan acknowledges its oppression of the Burakumin and Ainu.

    But you’re not comparing apples with apples. The issue here is primarily to do with education and knowledge of a country’s own misdeeds. It took a long time for America’s mistreatment of its indigenous people to become part of popular knowledge, but books such as Bury My Heart At Wounded Knee redressed that and became part of the secondary and tertiary education syllabus from the 1970s.

    Japan hasn’t done anything like that in relation to its mistreatment of various peoples in China and during WWII, although it is now about as far removed from those events as America was from the American Indian issues in the 1970s.

    Meanwhile there are American politicians, and a Republican no less leading the charge, who are pursuing such an apology. http://brownback.senate.gov/pressapp....cfm?id=312340
    http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c111:S.J.RES.14:

    Japan’s dominant party’s politicians’ response to Japan’s conduct in China and during WWII has been somewhat less apologetic. http://www.pacificwar.org.au/JapWarC...ing_truth.html


    Or its terrorist acitivities in Central America? Propping up brutal dictators in central and south America, middle east and Africa...
    These are not comparable, and are as irrelevant for the purposes of this discussion as is Japan’s conduct in its colony of Korea up to and during WWII.


    How about the Hawaii coup?
    If you want to beat the Yanks around their heads to demonstrate that they're at least as bad as the Japanese, you need to pick your examples more carefully.

    SECTION 1. ACKNOWLEDGMENT AND APOLOGY.

    The Congress -
    (1) on the occasion of the 100th anniversary of the illegal overthrow of the Kingdom of Hawaii on January 17, 1893, acknowledges the historical significance of this event which resulted in the suppression of the inherent sovereignty of the Native Hawaiian people;
    (2) recognizes and commends efforts of reconciliation initiated by the State of Hawaii and the United Church of Christ with Native Hawaiians;
    (3) apologizes to Native Hawaiians on behalf of the people of the United States for the overthrow of the Kingdom of Hawaii on January 17, 1893 with the participation of agents and citizens of the United States, and the deprivation of the rights of Native Hawaiians to self-determination;
    (4) expresses its commitment to acknowledge the ramifications of the overthrow of the Kingdom of Hawaii, in order to provide a proper foundation for reconciliation between the United States and the Native Hawaiian people; and
    (5) urges the President of the United States to also acknowledge the ramifications of the overthrow of the Kingdom of Hawaii and to support reconciliation efforts between the United States and the Native Hawaiian people.
    http://www.hawaii-nation.org/publawall.html

    Starting aggressive wars with Spain and Mexico?
    How far back do you want to go?

    Maybe you think America should apologise to Britain for the War of Independence?

    Or that Rome should apologise to Tunis for the Romans sacking Carthage?

    Oops! Rome actually did that, a couple of millennia after the event. http://www.saudiaramcoworld.com/issu...t.carthago.htm

    Japan looks on track to take about as long.
    Last edited by Rising Sun*; 11-01-2010 at 08:29 AM. Reason: typo
    ..
    A rational army would run away.
    Montesquieu

  4. #79
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    West Lafayette Indiana
    Posts
    265

    Default Re: Japanese Revisionism: Latest episode

    Quote Originally Posted by Rising Sun* View Post

    But you’re not comparing apples with apples. The issue here is primarily to do with education and knowledge of a country’s own misdeeds. It took a long time for America’s mistreatment of its indigenous people to become part of popular knowledge, but books such as Bury My Heart At Wounded Knee redressed that and became part of the secondary and tertiary education syllabus from the 1970s.
    If you are refering to the popular literature then the recognition goes much further back, into the 19th Century. There was a minority but public view or opinion that the genocide of the native nations was occuring and wrong. It went paralle to well intentioned but usually ineffective efforts to relieve the decline of the native people and prevent further genocide. This went along with the attitudes towards the African american slaves & former slaves. While one segment of the population advocated & practiced terror control (lynchings) another segment opposed it.

    Back in the 1970s I remember the leftists amoung the Baby Boomer generation accquired a conceit that social or moral virtue started with them & US history was devoid of any individual or group morality & justice before they came on the scene.

  5. #80
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    9,266

    Default Re: Japanese Revisionism: Latest episode

    Quote Originally Posted by Carl Schwamberger View Post
    If you are refering to the popular literature then the recognition goes much further back, into the 19th Century. There was a minority but public view or opinion that the genocide of the native nations was occuring and wrong. It went paralle to well intentioned but usually ineffective efforts to relieve the decline of the native people and prevent further genocide. This went along with the attitudes towards the African american slaves & former slaves. While one segment of the population advocated & practiced terror control (lynchings) another segment opposed it.
    Thanks for that.

    My knowledge pretty much started with the 1970s popular publications and discussion.

    Quote Originally Posted by Carl Schwamberger View Post
    Back in the 1970s I remember the leftists amoung the Baby Boomer generation accquired a conceit that social or moral virtue started with them & US history was devoid of any individual or group morality & justice before they came on the scene.
    Same thing here with the history of our indigenous people, about which I'm much better informed.

    The 1970s onwards outrage here was generally based in the belief that great wrongs had been uncovered, which they certainly had as far as exposing them to the general public was concerned, but often on implicit and wholly incorrect assumptions, and notably that everyone in previous generations had been a racist exterminator with contempt for the Aborigines and their culture or simply didn't care.
    ..
    A rational army would run away.
    Montesquieu

  6. #81
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    New Orleans La. USA
    Posts
    12

    Default Re: Japanese Revisionism: Latest episode

    I notice a phenomenon here that is common on most discussion boards dealing with recent history, that is, attempting to defray or mitigate guilt for the deeds of countries like Japan and Nazi Germany by accusing Allied Nations and most particularly the US of equally reprehensible actions.

    Certainly there are legitimate instances of heavy handed and in a very small number of cases criminal deeds that occurred in the course of a long and brutal war that was forced on the accused by the aggressive actions of the Axis nations. In this alone we have someone who accuses the U.S. and Britain of causing the war with Japan while steadfastly refusing to address Japan's aggressive and criminal actions which led to the supposed provocative actions of said nations.

    Another phenomenon that is common on WW 2 discussion boards is that it's almost mandatory to denigrate the US and it's contribution to the war effort. Surprisingly this attitude is limited to a few right wing kooks or neo-Nazis but is prevalent even among Europeans who benefited immeasurably from US our efforts to liberate Europe. It seems to be more common to see criticism of not only the US as a nation but even of the soldiers who were fighting and dieing their way across continental Europe in actions that saw the removal of an oppressive and murderous occupier. Why the resentment?

    I understand that in today's world many see the US as a bully because of it's willingness to assert it's economic and political and military power. That however is a completely different discussion. Perhaps it's just too difficult to separate the two issues?

  7. #82
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    South West
    Posts
    953

    Default Re: Japanese Revisionism: Latest episode

    Quote Originally Posted by Boutte View Post
    Another phenomenon that is common on WW 2 discussion boards is that it's almost mandatory to denigrate the US and it's contribution to the war effort. Surprisingly this attitude is limited to a few right wing kooks or neo-Nazis but is prevalent even among Europeans who benefited immeasurably from US our efforts to liberate Europe. It seems to be more common to see criticism of not only the US as a nation but even of the soldiers who were fighting and dieing their way across continental Europe in actions that saw the removal of an oppressive and murderous occupier. Why the resentment?

    I understand that in today's world many see the US as a bully because of it's willingness to assert it's economic and political and military power. That however is a completely different discussion. Perhaps it's just too difficult to separate the two issues?
    In Europe there is a tendency to react negatively to Hollywood's and the media's portrayal that the US won the war. Recent films portraying the US as capturing the Enigma machine and US pilots saving the day in the BoB as examples tend to give the impression that the US ignores any other contribution and indeed will re-write history to aggrandize itself. The general idea on some forums from Americans that the war started in 1941 (rather similar to WW1 when the US entered the war in 1917 and won it after the British and French had been sitting on their rears for years).

    Couple this with the attitude that gets noticed on many forums I am on with a certain type of American who beats his chest and says all enemies of the US should be killed, if 100 civilians have to die or be tortured to save one US serviceman's life its worth it. A recent one I have seen is an increase in the claim that (from alleged USMC persons, they always seem to be ex marines) that the US should make people fear the US so much that they will never consider attacking anything American.

    Modern perception quickly colours the past, and the loud voice of a few tends to get noticed more than the silence of the majority.
    IN the days of lace-ruffles, perukes and brocade
    Brown Bess was a partner whom none could despise
    An out-spoken, flinty-lipped, brazen-faced jade,
    With a habit of looking men straight in the eyes
    At Blenheim and Ramillies fops would confess
    They were pierced to the heart by the charms of Brown Bess.

  8. #83
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    New Orleans La. USA
    Posts
    12

    Default Re: Japanese Revisionism: Latest episode

    I can see that. Especially if someone is silly enough to consider Hollywood a source of historical information.

    On the other hand Capt. Rafe McCawley did single handedly win both the European and Pacific theaters of war. Anyone who disputes this is a know nothing fascist.

  9. #84
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Larue, Texas
    Posts
    238

    Default Re: Japanese Revisionism: Latest episode

    I think that Hollywood is the reason I became interested in History - I knew that so much I saw in the movies was wrong so I started to read and find out for myself.
    I believe that movies (and TV) are still where most people get their history. How many will bother to read anything about the Tuskegee Airmen before, or after, they see the movie?

Page 6 of 6 FirstFirst 123456

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Bookmarks

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •