Hot Topics | |
---|---|
Takechanpoo wrote:i understand China persistently keeps claiming j-atrocities. they should actually. yea
but....but about kimchese.... they do NOT have the legitimacy to claim anything to japan. japan lawfully colonized them. and they too did the same atrocities as korean japanese at that time like nazi's austrian did. origianlly japan didnt need to apologize to and compensate kimchese nevertheless we did even if it was imcompletely or not. WE DID in spite of no political legitimacy to do it. any other ex-major powers except empire japan have not yet apologized and compensated their ex-colonies because they colonized it lawfully.
Wage Slave wrote:How about an adequate amount of content and staging? Omission with selective brevity as well as "oops sorry, out of time" are common criticisms. No-one is suggesting masochism but a sweeping under the carpet of bits of history along with selective and ill supported heated denials of other bits doesn't do anyone any good. Least of all Japan in truth. It's wrecking decades of good intentions, good work and repair.
Takechanpoo wrote:just try to deny exaggerated part and fabricated part by C and K and to recognize ONLY the part of what truely happened.
Takechanpoo wrote:well.......generally speaking, it definitely lacks sense of ownership in J-ppl's view about what empire japan did.
the wording is as if one day suddenly a series of huge natural disasters came and passed away.....yea
Takechanpoo wrote:i should put it differently
among asian countries, the ones which have institutionalized-by-the government anti-japan sentiments are only China and Korea.
sorry for not explaining enough.
Salty wrote:Takechanpoo wrote:i should put it differently
among asian countries, the ones which have institutionalized-by-the government anti-japan sentiments are only China and Korea.
sorry for not explaining enough.
But would they institutionalize it if Japan didn`t deny or minimalize?
chokonen888 wrote:Salty wrote:Takechanpoo wrote:i should put it differently
among asian countries, the ones which have institutionalized-by-the government anti-japan sentiments are only China and Korea.
sorry for not explaining enough.
But would they institutionalize it if Japan didn`t deny or minimalize?
Judging by the museums, non-related claims and "history" in those countries, I'd have to go with yes. On the other hand, Japan's handling of the issues is a lesson in PR disasters...and still going.
Imagine how things would be if there was something more than dry statements in those history books...some reflection on the tragedies that occurred and hope that the same mistakes would never happen again...hell, what if there were monuments erected in Japan, paying tribute to the victims of Nanjing and the annexation of Korea? (I'm surprised no Koreans have tried to erect their own yet) I mean shit, this is a country where showing appreciation or regret is an art in it's own.
Salty wrote:Takechanpoo wrote:i should put it differently
among asian countries, the ones which have institutionalized-by-the government anti-japan sentiments are only China and Korea.
sorry for not explaining enough.
But would they institutionalize it if Japan didn`t deny or minimalize?
Takechanpoo wrote:Salty wrote:Takechanpoo wrote:i should put it differently
among asian countries, the ones which have institutionalized-by-the government anti-japan sentiments are only China and Korea.
sorry for not explaining enough.
But would they institutionalize it if Japan didn`t deny or minimalize?
your a fan of k-pop?
wangta wrote:Good points there Choko.
Japan's crown prince has warned of the need to remember World War II "correctly", in a rare foray into an ideological debate as nationalist politicians seek to downplay the country's historic crimes.
In an unusual intervention in the discussion, Naruhito's mild-mannered broadside was being interpreted in some circles as a rebuke to Prime Minister Shinzo Abe, a key figure in the right-wing drive to minimise the institutionalised system of wartime sex slavery.
"Today when memories of war are set to fade, I reckon it is important to look back our past with modesty and pass down correctly the miserable experience and the historic path Japan took from the generation who know the war to the generation who don't," Naruhito said.
Samurai_Jerk wrote:Japan crown prince warns on 'correct' historyJapan's crown prince has warned of the need to remember World War II "correctly", in a rare foray into an ideological debate as nationalist politicians seek to downplay the country's historic crimes.
In an unusual intervention in the discussion, Naruhito's mild-mannered broadside was being interpreted in some circles as a rebuke to Prime Minister Shinzo Abe, a key figure in the right-wing drive to minimise the institutionalised system of wartime sex slavery.
"Today when memories of war are set to fade, I reckon it is important to look back our past with modesty and pass down correctly the miserable experience and the historic path Japan took from the generation who know the war to the generation who don't," Naruhito said.
Yokohammer wrote:Samurai_Jerk wrote:Japan crown prince warns on 'correct' historyJapan's crown prince has warned of the need to remember World War II "correctly", in a rare foray into an ideological debate as nationalist politicians seek to downplay the country's historic crimes.
In an unusual intervention in the discussion, Naruhito's mild-mannered broadside was being interpreted in some circles as a rebuke to Prime Minister Shinzo Abe, a key figure in the right-wing drive to minimise the institutionalised system of wartime sex slavery.
"Today when memories of war are set to fade, I reckon it is important to look back our past with modesty and pass down correctly the miserable experience and the historic path Japan took from the generation who know the war to the generation who don't," Naruhito said.
I saw this earlier and immediately assumed that by "correct," he meant "correct as I see it." But after thinking about it for a minute I realised that it could be interpreted either way. The right wingnuts could just as easily take it to mean he's supporting their version of "correct," and no doubt they will.
chokonen888 wrote:Leave it to the top 'o yamato to say so much without really saying a thing.
wagyl wrote:chokonen888 wrote:Leave it to the top 'o yamato to say so much without really saying a thing.
That is the job of the monachy.
Who the fuck translated it so that a member of the Imperial family says "I reckon".....???
chokonen888 wrote:wagyl wrote:chokonen888 wrote:Leave it to the top 'o yamato to say so much without really saying a thing.
That is the job of the monachy.
Who the fuck translated it so that a member of the Imperial family says "I reckon".....???
Yeeeeeeeha y'all!
The debate on Japan’s history of wartime sexual slavery (aka the “comfort women” issue) has heated up again, with the Japanese government extending its efforts to revise school textbooks to overseas.
In November, McGraw-Hill, publisher of the world history textbook “Traditions and Encounters: A Global Perspective on the Past, Vol. 2,” by history professors Herbert Ziegler and Jerry Bentley, was contacted by Japan’s Consulate General in New York. The request: that two paragraphs (i.e., the entire entry) on the comfort women be deleted.
On Jan. 15, McGraw-Hill representatives met with Japanese diplomats and refused the request, stating that the scholars had properly established the historical facts. Later that month, Prime Minister Shinzo Abe directly targeted the textbook in a parliamentary session, stating that he was “shocked” to learn that his government had “failed to correct the things it should have.”
In the March issue of the American Historical Association’s newsmagazine “Perspectives on History,” 20 prominent historians, including professor Ziegler, signed a letter to the editor titled “Standing with the historians of Japan.” They stated that they “agree with Herbert Ziegler that no government should have the right to censor history,” and “oppose the efforts of states or special interests to pressure publishers or historians to alter the results of their research for political purposes.”
Professor Ziegler met with Debito on Feb. 17.
Debito: What has McGraw-Hill been asked to revise?
Herbert Ziegler: The original offense was the comfort women, and I think they essentially wanted me to leave it out or change it. I got a lot of references and emails about recent scholarship by Japanese scholars that pointed out how incorrect my writing is.
It was the comfort women, the Nanjing Massacre, and one other small thing that nobody else has talked about but the Consul (for Political Affairs) in Honolulu: In the first volume of the textbook, there is a map that shows the Sea of Japan labeled as such, but in one instance, in parentheses, it says “East Sea.” And I got lectured on how incorrect that is when the consul came to my office. I didn’t know it was there because the first volume my co-author wrote, not me. I didn’t even know it was a controversial subject.
Debito: Have you been personally contacted by the Abe government?
HZ: I was contacted by the local Consul for Political Affairs in Honolulu in November, wanting to discuss my textbook. I thought it was the oddest thing I’ve ever heard. “Discuss my textbook?” I said I wasn’t interested. He gave me times that I could visit the consulate, and he kept persisting. So I told them I talked to my publisher about this, and they said to forward the consulate’s concerns to their public relations department. So I got another email (from the consul) saying, “Well, New York is New York, Honolulu is Honolulu, and I need to see you in person.” I didn’t reply right away.
Next thing I know, I’m sitting in my office just like you and I are sitting here today — the door’s open, I have office hours. I was eating lunch. In pops the consul and an interpreter. They literally pulled up chairs and sat down. And then they started talking to me about my fallacies and problems, and why they wanted me to change things. I said, a bit spitefully, “It’s a little late now, the sixth edition just came out and it is unchanged, because I wasn’t aware that I had to change any of it.” And then we got into this discussion and I said, “Now look” — and here’s the thing I always want to get across — “It’s a textbook.”
A successful textbook gets revised every two to three years. One reason for revision is that interpretations change, and the facts may change. The publisher hires maybe a dozen specialists to go over this text, and they write critiques and reviews. When I look at them, I have to decide whether or not their critiques are justifiable, or out of nowhere, and so forth. And then, my co-author and I revise our text, as necessary, especially in regards to recent literature on the subject matter.
So I’m not opposed to revising anything, and if there were 300,000 victims of the Nanjing Massacre instead of the 400,000 I wrote, I will change it to 300,000. But very quickly I try to establish that my issue here had to do with the government. I said, “I don’t care if it’s a domestic or foreign government telling me what to write and what not to write.” And I told them I found that very offensive. It’s a violation of my freedom of speech and of academic freedom. It’s not like a few scholars had contacted me and said, “I read this book and I think there are a few inaccuracies.”
Did you know that in the 15 years this book has been out, not one reviewer hired by the publisher to ferret out mistakes has ever questioned anything about the comfort women? I’d never had a single Japanese scholar contact me, nor any Japanese newspaper, for 15 years. It is only now, all of a sudden. I’m not naive; I’m aware that this is the Abe’s government’s big campaign to do what I would consider revision of Japanese history.
I’m not a specialist in East Asian history. I teach world history, meaning I know very little about many things. I’m largely a scholar of German history. Germans had to deal with their past, especially during World War II. It wasn’t easy, it took time, but by and large the Germans have acknowledged and come to terms with the ugly parts of their past. The Japanese never have.
I suspect that young people in Japan grow up without knowing half the time what went on in the Second World War. That’s just a guess; I do not know. And maybe in Japan, and I do not know this either, the government has control over textbooks in schools. Not in America. Mine is not the only textbook, so people are free to pick and buy whatever they want.
So to me it came down to this interference of a foreign government: Even if I were 90 percent wrong about what I wrote, I would not revise it just because the consul of the Japanese Consulate tells me to — it’s ridiculous.
Debito: Did they listen to what you had to say?
HZ: No. Total lecture mode. Everything I wrote was just totally wrong. It became obvious to me what was going on. It didn’t matter what argument I might have made to convince them otherwise. It was a one-sided conversation.
You see, if you would have walked in and introduced yourself as a scholar of modern Japanese history, and you had taken offense at things that I am propagating, we’d sit down and talk about it. That’s not how it was. It was a guy in a suit accompanied by a woman telling me I’m wrong, wrong. “Retract it. Revise it.”
More
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 97 guests