Blinky Ishihara: Don't Buy the 'Peace and Love' Party Line

[FG Lurker]

[FG Lurker]

Found the original here. It doesn't seem to be any better than the slightly cut down LA Times version.

Blinky seems to have a few pieces up on that site. Another one here: http://www.digitalnpq.org/archive/2004_winter/ishihara.html

[Buraku]

He tops the public polls for the next Prime Minister, I wonder how Chinese will react ?






doubt the Russians or S.Koreans will put up with anymore of this guys bullshit

[Ketou]

I actually read the article before realizing it was written by Ishihara and I must say I didn't think there was much there that was wrong.

[FG Lurker]

I actually read the article before realizing it was written by Ishihara and I must say I didn't think there was much there that was wrong.

There are some valid points in there... It's just hard to read as it jumps all over the place. There are also some typical Ishihara-style attacks (lack of civil society in China).

When read with an overall understanding of Ishihara's views it tends to take on a darker light.

[Neo-Rio]

He may be right, but if he wants to stop giving ammo to the Chinese he's going the wrong way about it.

[Socratesabroad]

I actually read the article before realizing it was written by Ishihara and I must say I didn't think there was much there that was wrong.

There are some valid points in there... It's just hard to read as it jumps all over the place. There are also some typical Ishihara-style attacks (lack of civil society in China).

When read with an overall understanding of Ishihara's views it tends to take on a darker light.

I agree completely - Ishihara does make quite a few decent points (my favorite being Chinese claims to Taiwan=Adolf Hitler's claims to Austria), but he also stumbles a bit. Classic Ishihara non sequitors do pop up, though: WTF was he saying about Lenovo and IBM's PC div. [calling IBM's division technologically backward was a compliment, right?]? And wealth 'vulgarly displayed' by the purchase of Daimler Chrysler cars [instead of Honda or Mazda, I guess]?

As with anyone rabidly espousing a certain view, Ishihara sometimes has you nodding your head in agreement and scratching your head in utter confusion five minutes later.

[Socratesabroad]

He may be right, but if he wants to stop giving ammo to the Chinese he's going the wrong way about it.

China's going to find 'ammo' to support its views no matter what Ishihara says. China lecturing Japan about the veracity of history textbooks, feigning ignorance of the creation of 'popular' Anti-Japan movements in a country with state-regulated media, and lambasting Japan's new aggressive stance in response to moves by China's proxy North Korea...no rich irony there.

[Samurai_Jerk]

There are also some typical Ishihara-style attacks (lack of civil society in China).

Actually, many political scientists would argue that there's a lack of civil society in China and they're probably right. I wouldn't characterize this as a "typical Ishihara-style attack".

[FG Lurker]

There are also some typical Ishihara-style attacks (lack of civil society in China).

Actually, many political scientists would argue that there's a lack of civil society in China and they're probably right. I wouldn't characterize this as a "typical Ishihara-style attack".

Did you bother to read the article? He made a blanket statement that there was no civil society in China before the rise of communism: "It is a historical fact that before communism, mainland China lacked a civil society."

[Samurai_Jerk]

There are also some typical Ishihara-style attacks (lack of civil society in China).

Actually, many political scientists would argue that there's a lack of civil society in China and they're probably right. I wouldn't characterize this as a "typical Ishihara-style attack".

Did you bother to read the article? He made a blanket statement that there was no civil society in China before the rise of communism: "It is a historical fact that before communism, mainland China lacked a civil society."

Do you know what civil society means?

[AssKissinger]

Nice job putting up the whole article. This was a little bit before your time but the official FG etiquette for that is to put a short blurb and a link on the front page. Then if for some reason (like registration or you fear the link will soon die) you want to paste up a long excerpt you do that on the second post.

[Socratesabroad]

[FG Lurker]

Nice job putting up the whole article. This was a little bit before your time but the official FG etiquette for that is to put a short blurb and a link on the front page. Then if for some reason (like registration or you fear the link will soon die) you want to paste up a long excerpt you do that on the second post.

Yes, I know the etiquette, and it's not unique to FG. The LA Times articles tend to dissappear after awhile (as I mentioned in the post ).

Forgot to split it though...Guess that took up rather a lot of space on the front page.

[dimwit]

Despite official media restrictions, there are reports of public corruption being whitewashed by the government, whose desire to maintain a one-party dictatorship prevents it from questioning the abuses. Instead, the government incites a dangerous kind of patriotism to divert public frustration.

Which country are we talking about here?

Not a fan of China, and to a large extent Ishihara is correct in much of his analysis. GOD what am I saying!!!

[Buraku]

Are the Japanese fucking suicidal idiots or something ?

Yeah, damn right China is full of fucking commies and Mao was a fucked up dictator, and Chinese are militant fucks.

But that is no excuse for Nipponese stupidity

Powell when he was around had already backed the OneChina policy, Armitage said he wouldn't defend Taiwan, while GW did a U-Turn on the Taiwan stance.

Jiminto and the Japanese uyoku right wingers are a bunch of fucking fools, everytime these idiots do some of their Yasukuni rubbish it causes trouble in Asia and speaking to a number of Vietnamese, Russians and South Koreans you'll understand many are still bitter over Japan with its whitewashing of books or claims to new Nippon islands.

There are many idiots leading Japan, Kajiyama Seiroku said the Koreans wanted invasions and said the sex slaves were nothing more than Japan hookers, Nakasone called Amercians weak because Nee-groes lowered the IQ, while Norota and Tokyo Governor IshiHitler ( who calls Chinese 'dogs' ) insist the whites started the war against Japan.












Chinese Vice-Premier Wu Yi already quit talks with Koizumi, the Russians call the Japanese basket cases, while South Koreans talk of diplomatic war. They might be able to steal some isles from the S.Koreans but if Japan were to start trouble with China, you can say goodbye to Tokyo and the rest of Japan.

[Samurai_Jerk]

[Buraku]

Uncle Sam won't do shit, and neither will the Chicom Chinese

Bush is getting a roasting in Iraq, not as bad as Vietnam but there is massive anti-American Arabic hatred


China won't do crap because it sells a heap of stuff to the USA and Europe and make too much money by selling to the West and getting those Euros/Dollars. That's why commie China is trying to be good and perhaps why Powell changed his tune on Taiwan and Bush reversed his China policy.


As for Japan
I'd hardly call it civilistation, massive suicide clubs, racial slurs from Mori, hentai vending machines, a concrete Tokyo slum, racist rants from Ishihara, women only trains to stop perverts....

without help from the Aussies/Chinese/Americans Japan would still be running around naked chucking spears at wildlife and trying to chop each other up with swords, chasing eachother naked screaming Banzai

Blinky Ishihara may think its clever to make a land grab for a few S.Korean isles. But a war today will be unlike WW2 a battle with South Koreans, Russians, NK or Chinese might be over real fast.


All the guys in China will have to do is hit Tokyo once and Japan will be crippled. Blinky Shintaro will have dug his own grave.

[Samurai_Jerk]

As for Japan
I'd hardly call it civilistation, massive suicide clubs, racial slurs from Mori, hentai vending machines, a concrete Tokyo slum, racist rants from Ishihara, women only trains to stop perverts....

You're right. Japan is the worst place on earth. No other country has problems like Japan does.

[Buraku]

You're right. Japan is the worst place on earth. No other country has problems like Japan does.

No, it ain't the worst
but its not the best also

Yasukuni fools and Nakasone ministers have no right to look down on foreign folk, or make slurs on other Asians. It wasn't so long ago that the Japanese were fleeing to Peru and the Americas because of homeless problems and poverty.

Governor blink should fix the corrupt banks and homeless problems in Tokyo instead of wasting tax money on some militant, land grab agenda in Asia. Soon enough Blinky might find out he made a bad move by giving the SKoreans the fuck-u gesture, the uyoku are also making Asia unfriendly.

[FG Lurker]

There are also some typical Ishihara-style attacks (lack of civil society in China).

Actually, many political scientists would argue that there's a lack of civil society in China and they're probably right. I wouldn't characterize this as a "typical Ishihara-style attack".

Did you bother to read the article? He made a blanket statement that there was no civil society in China before the rise of communism: "It is a historical fact that before communism, mainland China lacked a civil society."

Do you know what civil society means?

Yes.

My point was not that China fit western definitions of having a civil society. Trying to squeeze (ancient) Asian cultures into modern western definitions is a typical square peg/round hole problem.

Anyway, my point was that historically speaking (as Blinky was stating) China was no more or less civil than Japan and therefore Blinky's statement was a typical anti-China attack.

[Socratesabroad]

My point was not that China fit western definitions of having a civil society. Trying to squeeze (ancient) Asian cultures into modern western definitions is a typical square peg/round hole problem.

That's why I took pains to illustrate that while 'civil society' is defined in various ways, it generally tends to indicate some freedom from interference by the state.

All observers agree that civil society refers to voluntary participation by average citizens and thus does not include behavior imposed or even coerced by the state.
http://www.beyondintractability.org/m/civil_society.jsp

Anyway, my point was that historically speaking (as Blinky was stating) China was no more or less civil than Japan and therefore Blinky's statement was a typical anti-China attack.

Ah, therein lies the rub. While once feudal and militarily autocratic, Japan has transformed into a civil society as evidenced by individual freedom in economic and political spheres (the last point may be debated, but a key indicator in favor would be non-native, i.e. naturalized, citizens serving in major gov't positions). Chinese gov't, however, has never allowed such individual freedom in economic or political spheres and thus has had no civil society.

[FG Lurker]

Anyway, my point was that historically speaking (as Blinky was stating) China was no more or less civil than Japan and therefore Blinky's statement was a typical anti-China attack.

Ah, therein lies the rub. While once feudal and militarily autocratic, Japan has transformed into a civil society as evidenced by individual freedom in economic and political spheres (the last point may be debated, but a key indicator in favor would be non-native, i.e. naturalized, citizens serving in major gov't positions). Chinese gov't, however, has never allowed such individual freedom in economic or political spheres and thus has had no civil society.

I don't disagree that Japanese and Chinese society are vastly different today. I am saying (as did you I think) that historically they were not all that different. Blinky however said, "It is a historical fact that before communism, mainland China lacked a civil society."

The point of my ramblings is that Blinky seems to think that before the war China had no (western-defined) civil society. Yet before the war Japan also had no (western-defined) civil society! This is why I say it was a typical Blinky-style anti-China rant.

[cstaylor]

Plus Ishihara is trying to extrapolate from the brief (for China) fall of the last dynasty, rise of Chinese nationalism under Sun Yat-sen, and the warring split between Chiang Kai-Shek and Mao. Had the Chinese attacked Japan during the period following the fall of the Ashikaga and the solidification of power under Toyotomi, they could have made the same claim.

[Socratesabroad]

The point of my ramblings is that Blinky seems to think that before the war China had no (western-defined) civil society. Yet before the war Japan also had no (western-defined) civil society! This is why I say it was a typical Blinky-style anti-China rant.

Your raise a fair point - Japan didn't have a civil society before the war, either - so I'll concede. As Blinky worded it, well, he sounds like a crank.

But the idea that China isn't a civil society isn't news to anyone who's lived or spent considerable time here. So Blinky has me agreeing with him on some stuff and overlooking the rest...

[FG Lurker]

The point of my ramblings is that Blinky seems to think that before the war China had no (western-defined) civil society. Yet before the war Japan also had no (western-defined) civil society! This is why I say it was a typical Blinky-style anti-China rant.

Your raise a fair point - Japan didn't have a civil society before the war, either - so I'll concede.

My first posts weren't very well written... Guess we could have avoided this little discussion if I had been clearer.

As Blinky worded it, well, he sounds like a crank.

If it walks like a duck and talks like a duck... ]But the idea that China isn't a civil society isn't news to anyone who's lived or spent considerable time here. So Blinky has me agreeing with him on some stuff and overlooking the rest...[/quote]The odd thing is that his statement (maybe it was poorly translated?) seems to imply that China has a civil society today.

In any case, I'm no China expert... Basically I wish Blinky would stop sticking his foot in his mouth and pissing off everyone else in Asia!

[devicenull]

There are also some typical Ishihara-style attacks (lack of civil society in China).

Actually, many political scientists would argue that there's a lack of civil society in China and they're probably right. I wouldn't characterize this as a "typical Ishihara-style attack".

Did you bother to read the article? He made a blanket statement that there was no civil society in China before the rise of communism: "It is a historical fact that before communism, mainland China lacked a civil society."

And the great irony, is that Japanese "society" was largely just a poor copy of Chinese society back in the day. Many aspects of which have long been abandoned or updated in the mainland, have been warped and ingrained in Japan in a fucked up way.