I don't know much, but some thoughts

Date: 2007-09-02 05:04 pm (UTC)
Last time I read about Yasukuni, I saw stuff saying the war criminals hadn't been initially enshrined there, but that the shrine had claimed them later -- in the 1960s? So you could see that as aggressive, militaristic. But I also saw a claim that there was a disconnect between Shinto and other ideas of the afterlife: Shinto not having a hell, and being accepted into the hordes of kami being everyone's due, and also something that purifies one of sin. So others see "they're enshrining their criminals!" and the defenders say "we're doing what's done for dead people." Though I guess one could ask "why be enshrined at Yasukuni, as opposed to some little shrine for war criminals?" But I could see that presupposing a distinction the Japanese might not be inclined to make even without unwillingness to face up to facts/accept our version of things.

Pearl Harbor: unprovoked except for our oil sanctions on Japan, which were unprovoked except for Japan's aggression against China and European colonies in Asia; how dare Japan imitate or interfere with our colonialism!

The 1911 Britannica has an interesting piece on recent-at-the-time history, written by a Japanese scholar. I don't remember where it was, though presumably in the "Japan" article. But yes, their interference in Korea and China was made to sound *so* civilized and kindly and rational...

I think Hiroshima wasn't even the biggest bombing -- just among the most dramatic, because of the one bomb needed. Weren't you the one who noted how almost everything in Tokyo was "rebuilt" after the war?
This account has disabled anonymous posting.
If you don't have an account you can create one now.
HTML doesn't work in the subject.
More info about formatting

December 2018

S M T W T F S
      1
2345678
91011 12131415
16171819202122
23242526272829
3031     

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated Apr. 25th, 2026 09:24 pm
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios