Japan rewriting history books

[Neil]

Japan could have helped itself on this issue long ago by not getting itself onto the losing side of war.  Heck, if they did that, they might still own Sakhalin.

Is Sakhalin really that good?

Besides, a Japan that didn't lose WWII would be objectively worse than one that did.  The occupation was a pretty good thing, and the destruction of Imperial Japan allowed them to build a modern Japan that was far better in pretty much every way than the old.

The resources and extra space would be nice for them.  And probably used far more effectively than in the hands of Russia.

Completely agree on the latter point.

I wonder though.  The extra space would probably be pretty meaningless.  It's not really that nice a place to live, and northern Hokkaido isn't exactly heavily populated.  Resources always help, but it's not like Sakhalin has massive oil reserves or anything.

Besides, barring the war, the Soviets would probably have taken the island back after Japanese society collapsed into revolution and chaos.

[Neil]

I don't think any country can really be mature about its own history.  There's always an emotional component.

Germany seems to be able to deal with its past.

Not really.  Germany doesn't have a healthy relationship to their past either.

[Razgovory]

I don't think any country can really be mature about its own history.  There's always an emotional component.

I agree.

[dps]

I don't think any country can really be mature about its own history.  There's always an emotional component.

Germany seems to be able to deal with its past.

Also Belgium. I think it has something to do with getting curbstomped.

Doesn't seem to have helped France deal with their past all that much.  Besides, in WWII Japan arguably got curbstomped at least as badly as Germany.

[Admiral Yi]

Also Belgium. I think it has something to do with getting curbstomped.

I thought the Belgian line was the Belgian Congo was Leopold's private hobby and they had nothing to do with it.  That's not exactly coming to terms.

[Archy]

That's indeed the Belgian line. Since Congo was the private domain of Leo II. Off course we profited of it and many of his administrators and ministers of the free state were Belgian. 
Belgian govt wasn't interested in colonies, Leo II was, which was also in Hochschildt's book.
That's why their was a Congo Free State and not a Belgian Congo before the scandal and the scandal was the reason he had to hand it over to Belgium. All of the Profit of the free state went to Leo II who used it to finance his domains. It's only after his death that they went to the Belgian state.

[Josquius]

Senkakus are definitely Japanese, but Dokdo is just as assuredly Korean.

Koreans do obsess over it out of proportion to what it is though, a rock. However, Japan certainly does not help itself by white washing its actions during the occuption and the war.
China is the real threat to Japan, and the Japanese are sabotaging their own national interests by continuing to provoke Korea in this way.

Not just as assuredly
With the liancourts the evidence is pretty good that both countries have included it as part of their territory for quite some time.
If Korea hadn't been a knob about it and it was up to me I would probably give the edge to Korea but it is not so clean cut as the senkakus.
That Korea has acted the way they did though.... And in the interests of moving things forward and peace and love .... I like the decision of that American judge in halving them.

As for japan provoking Korea.... Huh?
Korea practically makes a sport of poking japan every chance it gets. With japan the absolute worst you can say is they're not trying to heal relations.


The idea that japan white washes it's history is just wrong.
There's a lot to dislike japan for. Militant nationalism and white washing of history really doesn't factor on the list at all, despite it being what they get so much shit  for abroad.

[Josquius]

Japan could have helped itself on this issue long ago by not getting itself onto the losing side of war.  Heck, if they did that, they might still own Sakhalin.

Is Sakhalin really that good?

Besides, a Japan that didn't lose WWII would be objectively worse than one that did.  The occupation was a pretty good thing, and the destruction of Imperial Japan allowed them to build a modern Japan that was far better in pretty much every way than the old.

Hmm.., without the war, the economic boom and bust, and the need to totally rebuild their cities they might not have the population troubles they do today.without the war dead they could well have quite a larger population.
But yes, karafuto ken would look pretty on a map but not be worth much.

Japan without the war in general- hard to argue about without establishing base parameters. The war didn't just happen, it came about because of the messed up economic situation and the rise of the militarist regime; under which war was always going to happen.
In the 20s though japan with the taisho democracy was on a pretty progressive development path, on track towards democracy. Id like to think if that had continued then modern japan at the worst would be like Thailand with the emperor.
Once the age of nationalism is over state Shintoism just starts to look silly to an educated, free populace.

[Martinus]

I don't think any country can really be mature about its own history.  There's always an emotional component.

Germany seems to be able to deal with its past.

Also Belgium. I think it has something to do with getting curbstomped.

I don't know about you but getting two nukes dropped on you should count as "curb stomped" in my book.

[MadImmortalMan]

I know of at least one Asian woman who has absolutely no trace whatsoever of being submissive 

You should fix that. 

[Lettow77]

Once the age of nationalism is over state Shintoism just starts to look silly to an educated, free populace.

I think this gives the Japanese far too much credit for initiative and critical self-evaluation. Japanese are so good about being unwilling to leave the comfort zone of what is Japanese, which in turn is received truth and not to be questioned. Japan was capable of changing so quickly because it was top down, which gels nicely with their mentality. No drone is going to start a revolution in thought.

[grumbler]

...The idea that japan white washes it's history is just wrong...

Every Japanese person I know would laugh at this assertion.   Admittedly, they are all college-educated and have spent time outside of Japan, but they'd think you delusional or intentionally dishonest.  You simply cannot say things like this as an innocent mistake.

[Neil]

In the 20s though japan with the taisho democracy was on a pretty progressive development path, on track towards democracy. Id like to think if that had continued then modern japan at the worst would be like Thailand with the emperor.

The polity was completely inverted in Japan.  Because of the hard work of the genro, and Yamagata in particular, the military was wagging the dog of the government, as active-duty officers had to agree to serve in the cabinet.  The imperial right of command, as applied in Japan, created a whole host of problems that weren't going to be resolved without violence.  In Germany, you had the concept of 'working towards the Führer', where officials would do what they figured Hitler would want, without any explicit orders.  In the case of Hirohito, it was even worse since he almost never intervened in politics after the railway bombing incident.

[Razgovory]

Well, I'm glad I'm not the only one who read Ian Kershaw's book.

[Josquius]

The polity was completely inverted in Japan.  Because of the hard work of the genro, and Yamagata in particular, the military was wagging the dog of the government, as active-duty officers had to agree to serve in the cabinet.  The imperial right of command, as applied in Japan, created a whole host of problems that weren't going to be resolved without violence.  In Germany, you had the concept of 'working towards the Führer', where officials would do what they figured Hitler would want, without any explicit orders.  In the case of Hirohito, it was even worse since he almost never intervened in politics after the railway bombing incident.

But here we're talking about a situation where there was no Manchurian Incident. By then the militarists were already on their way to taking control and it was too late.
Keep the economic situation in the 20s more stable, have Japan keep good relations with the UK and US, and they wouldn't necessary go down this path.

I think this gives the Japanese far too much credit for initiative and critical self-evaluation. Japanese are so good about being unwilling to leave the comfort zone of what is Japanese, which in turn is received truth and not to be questioned. Japan was capable of changing so quickly because it was top down, which gels nicely with their mentality. No drone is going to start a revolution in thought.

Tatemae I would agree. Japanese would keep waving flags and going "Yay emperor!" until today and beyond.
Honne though.... Just look at modern Japan and how little people care about their religion, even without the statist elements. It is still a big part of what it means to be Japanese, they still respect it (as religions go it is quite cool so can't say I blame them), but few of them really take it all that seriously.
I just don't see the emperor worship thing continuing to be believed as Japan develops, nor do I see the government making too much of an effort to encourage it once its use is at an end.