So if right wingers are angered by koreans not they can give joke and say Korea does not deserve independence or so on? You were, infact, insulting all the people like Murayama, Kono all those reasonable liberal Japanese too by saying that. But you don't care because it was a joke. People who say these things are not that different from right wingers in my opinion, because right wingers say similar jokes, they are just on different side.
-2 ( +2 / -4 )
Shinjuku no Yaju Then actually, your view is very similar to mine. Ideally, I also want japan and korea to do joint investigation on this. It would be better if third party like the US join the investigation also. But these things are not likely to happen.
Then is it still not ok if Abe let as many liberal japanese historians and conservative historians investigate? What if all the documents and argument were open to the public?
0 ( +2 / -2 )
Smithinjapan and Shinjuku no Yaju I am siding with CH3CHO on this matter that some kind of investigation is necessary somewhere, sometimes, about gov's involvement in coercion. Are you against any kind of investigation itself? or are you against it because Abe is doing it?
0 ( +4 / -4 )
Peacetrain I don't know which nationality you have but if you are American and saying " Maybe the US should have just made this the 51st state after all." I sometimes read this kind of thing but isn't that the idea similar to imperialism? The Idea that we are ruling people who are incapable of ruling themselves. Not far from what Tamogami and other right wingers might say that Korea should have been annexed by other nations because they keep on whining and crying? Both of these sounds awful for me.
Praack "Even one is too many" Raping of one woman is bad, you are right. But you probably know that raping by soldiers happened in almost any nation. Including allies during the war. British and the US military has used German and Japanese military brothels when they took over the place Germany and Japan were holding. Soviets raped many Germans and Japanese women were also raped by some of the allied forces. Allies were fighting self-defense war but would that justify raping? Japan is awful, I agree with you, but what's your opinion on these things if you are going to say "one is too many"? Also, if those korean people building memorials do not care about the numbers like you, they don't have to write exaggerated numbers. Same is true with Nanjing. They just have to say it happened and that will be sufficient. That seems like a double standarnd.
1 ( +2 / -1 )
The comfort women memorial in Glendale is criticized by conservatives and rightists in Japan because some of the comfort women issue is still controversial in Japan such as coercion. Inscription on the memorial says there were 200,000 women being enslaved by Japanese Imperial army, but there is almost no historical evidence that such a number of women were forced to serve as sex slave. I don't know if it is a total lie as Nakayama claims but at least there is no hard evidence. But don't misunderstand me, I am thinking there were women who were virtually forced to serve but 200,000 is unreasonable.
Rightist people might also be angry about the inscription on the memorial, because it can be read as if the Japanese government was involved in coercion of sex slavery, which is becoming a controversial issue in Japan. The rightist and conservatives are protesting to Kono statement and the memorial about basically the same thing, and that is whether the Japanese gov was involved in coercion or not. Even though Kono statement is basically a good thing in my view, bad side of it was that the Japanese government did not show what kind of testimonies and evidence were used for the statement as it is stated in this article, and that is causing rightist and conservative reason to give criticism about it. And when these criticisms are given, Korean people gets angry saying Japan is whitewashing its crimes, and Japanese rightists gets angry saying koreans are blaming us for things we did not do. So I believe it is more constructive to look at what was the bad part of Kono statement, rather than blaming rightists for everything.
I believe this is why Abe is saying there need to be investigation, or at least there is "Tatemae" for investigation. Ideally korean gov should also join investigation, or at least japanese liberal and coservative historians should join, in my opinion. If koreans want to build memorials, it would be better to build them after Korea and Japan's recognition of comfort women come together. Otherwise, more rightist or conservatives will criticize the memorial and koreans will be enraged and it will keep on going forever. It might take years for Japan and korea to reconcile on this matter, but the number one priority for both Korean and Japan now would not be building memorials but investigating and finding out the truth, and sharing that truth between Korea and Japan.
It is true that some conservatives and many rightwingers give criticism to Kono statement but it is also true that Kono statement have been succeeded by all the cabinets that existed in Japan since it was made, including Koizumi who visited Yasukuni and Abe. And, as I have repeatedly said, the main criticism toward Kono statement have been that it accepted government involvement in coercion (or sexual slavery?) with testimonies that are unreliable, and Abe wants to do investigation on that. I don't know what the outcome will be but, if this problem is solved, I think things will be better. Another problem might rise, but at least we are closer to the truth. This is the only way to make rightists silent about Kono statement, or else we have to criminalize criticizing Kono statement, but I am against the latter idea for things are still controversial and I basically believe in market of free speech.
The attempts to make legislature for Asian women fund failed and the reason is not clear but my assumption is that it would be related to 1965 treaty between Japan and korea, and the criticism toward Kono statement that it is based on unreliable testimonies. However there is also fact that before Kono statement was made, korean president Kim Young-sam said Korean government won't demand compensation for comfort women. The korean government said its demand for Japan is to admit government's involvement in coercion, and korean gov won't ask for any compensation later. These things were reported in Japanese newspapers. And if this is true, this might be another reason why Asian's women fund was not given legislation in the diet. I want Japanese to admit things they have done, but I also want Koreans to recognize and accept these things, if this is true. There were korean people who received Kono statement as a good step for Japan, and I also think it is basically a good thing, but if I'm not mistaken, there were also korean people criticizing Kono statement from the beginning such as "The Korean Council for the Women Drafted for Military Sexual Slavery by Japan"(or Teitaikyo in Japanese), and there were korean medias being critical toward Kono statement from the beginning, I don't know the details but it is on japanese newspaper at that time.
Teitaikyo criticized those korean comfort women who testified for Kono statement, saying something like, Teitaikyo will not help whitewashing of Japan, and They also criticized those women who received compensation from Asian women's fund. saying Japanese gov is escaping from its responsiblity and comfort women receiving these compensation is becoming a prostitute by doing that so don't do that.
I don't know if Teitaikyo is widely supported in Korea, but I feel they are doing more harm to relationship between Korean and Japan than good on it. I want reasonable Korean people to speak up agaist those korean people who seems to be going too far in criticizing Japan. Because korea has freedom of speech unlike China and that is a good thing for korea. But I am sad if speaking up in any way to defend Japan in Korea is seen as a bad thing in Korea. And at the same time, Japan need to face it past in a proper way as many koreans and chinese claim. And I detest sayings like Tamogami made in this article, I wonder if he feels any shame in saying this.
-3 ( +3 / -6 )
I agree with you that Germany is doing fairly good. And I won't say what Japan has been doing is good, but I also do not think what Japan has been doing is really bad either about comfort women, even though there are some right wingers who say wrong things.
Kono statement and East Asian women fund were not bad things, rather they were good thing. But right wingers tend to criticize kono statement saying it apologizes for things we don't have to, and koreans tend to criticize kono statement as if it is meaningless because there is no cabinet decision or because some right wingers say wrong things after that. Same is true with East Asian women fund, right wingers criticize as if they are paying for things we don't have to pay, and koreans are saying it is insufficient mainly because Japanese gov is not paying it or admitting legal responsibility to comfort women. But I think both of these criticisms are not constructive, Kono statement might be vague, and East Asian women fund might or might not be insufficient, but we should evaluate good part of good things.
In my opinion, Kono statement and East Asian women fund had meaningful part, that is why I am against withdrawal of the whole kono statement. If controversial issue of coercion in Kono statement is causing right wingers to say things about Kono statement, I feel it is better to clarify what really happened, and I hope that will make more of them silent. If they don't become silent after things became clear, I will place more blame on right wingers.
0 ( +2 / -2 )
I don't deny Germany is doing good repenting on Nazi crimes, and I know there are revisionists in Japan who tend to whitewash war crimes of Japan. But I am feeling Germany too had to struggle over controversial issues, especially when it came to issue of war crimes by Wehrmacht(Germany defense force).
Exhibition about war crimes of Wehrmacht became a controversial issue in Germany in 1995, involving right wingers, neo nazis, and liberals. There were violent crimes done by Neo Nazis who were against that exhibition.
After many argument German Bundestag came to resolution in 1997 that accepted the fact that some individuals of Wehrmacht were involved in war crimes and denied the view of "unblemished Wehrmacht", but at the same time, the German parliament denied Wehrmacht's organizational involvement in war crimes, which is the view left wing parties of Germany had been supporting.
Therefore Bundestag has accepted one part of accusation and denied the other part, and I don't know if they were right in doing that, but my opinion is that they had the right to investigate how Wehrmacht were involved in war crimes, no matter what Poland or France or Austria or Jewish people are claiming. And if Germany had done fair and good investigation and came to that conclusion, I think Germany has the right to deny false accusation on Wehrmacht, and I won't call that whitewashing. Things might be little bit similar with comfort women issue. Investigation is necessary, but only fair and sound one and that is why Abe should show what kind of documents, evidences are used in his investigation, and I also think it is better to investigate with korea, if possible.
1 ( +2 / -1 )
It is good for Japan to apologize about comfort women, and if Abe is trying to withdraw whole Kono statement, I am totally against him. But if he is only trying to investigate and clarify what the word coercive means in Kono statement, then I can understand what he is trying to do.
But I can also understand korean people being suspicious toward Abe that he might use his chance of investigating Kono statement to whitewash history. So Abe should at least make it open to the public, how he is investigating, using what kind of documents or testimonies、so that people can know if his reasoning is fair or not. Same thing is true with apology when apology like Kono statement is made, I think it is better to make it clear what kind of documents and testimonies were used to make that apology.
2 ( +2 / -0 )
"It's also sad when said people insist you 'move on' and 'forget about it' while on their way to the Hiroshima Peace Park or Yasukuni or somewhere that remembers what happened. "
If China is using commemoration of Nanjing Massacre to rise hated toward Japan or anti-Japan feeling among its people, then I see difference between commemoration of China and especially Hiroshima peace park. Most of the Japanese people attending Hiroshima Peace Memorial ceremony is not having hate toward the US but they seem to be genuinely praying for peace that these things would never happen again, and the ceremony's purpose is to pray for peace. I think it is a good thing to do that.
If China is using commemoration just to pray for peace and not to increase hated toward Japan, to pray these things never happen again, then there won't be much difference as you say. Even controversial Yasukuni, I feel many people who visit Yasukuni do not have hatred toward the US today, even though some people who visits there are holding views that tend to put more blame on the US for WWII.
3 ( +4 / -1 )
If I'm not misunderstanding him, CBG spender probably meant, are the right wingers really that stupid enough to make more enemies for themselves when they are already confronting china and korea and liberals in Japan? Your answer will be yes, Spender's answer will be no.
I don't know which one of you is right but I am also thinking if the right wingers did this, why did the right wingers damage Anne Frank's diary? I hear right wingers say Holocaust was much worse than what Japan did but I do not hear many of them denying Holocaust. And there are tons of other books in libraries that they will hate, regarding WWII and war crimes of Japan more than Anne's diary. So it's hard for me to understand why do they have to damage Anne's diary first. If they are doing this, they deserve harsh criticism, but if not, I kind of feel pity to them for being blamed. Same is true for saying it's koreans or chinese, I think we should wait before saying who is to be blamed.
2 ( +3 / -1 )
"Germany paid a very large sum in war time damages which it won't finish paying until 2030. It also paid additional damage to Israel and Jews." I think it is good thing that Japan apologize to those women who had served as comfort women and I think those people who say there were no raping or there was no virtually forcing of comfort women is wrong(at the same time I am thinking not all the women were forced to serve). But I am not sure about your criticism, , have Germany apologized specifically for military brothels in anyway like Kono Statement, or has Germany paid compensation to women who have been virtually forced to serve in the military brotherls? I found out that it has been discussed in Germany, but not sure whether they have already paid compensations. I feel wrong criticism won't solve any problem.
-3 ( +1 / -4 )
Answering questions like killing 50 is better than killing million or not is already a difficult question for me to answer, but anyway, I agree people would have various answers to these questions and I wish China and Japan become a friend in the future.
0 ( +0 / -0 )
I still don't understand your view fully. I'm sorry if I misunderstood you but you seem to think killing 50 equals to killing millions. I thought about your view and many questions came into my mind. From your view, is a military killing one civilian as bad as Holocaust which killed about 6millions? Is atomic bombing or Dresden bombing as bad as nanjing? If Chinese gov is persecuting Tibet and killing Tibetans, is it as bad as Nanjing?
0 ( +0 / -0 )
I understand what you want to say, I think killing 100,000 and 200,000 are both awfully bad. But I am not sure how far you are going to extend that argument, if death toll is ranging from killing hundreds of people to killing more than thirty thousand people, probably you are not going to say they are equally bad.
I think the reality is that majority of the people around the world(not only Chinese and Japanese) cares about how many people were killed in the atrocities especially when numbers are significantly different like from few hundred to thirty thousand, and at the same time they will also understand your feeling that killing 100,000 and 200,000 are both almost equally bad.
0 ( +0 / -0 )
It"S ME I think you are right, there are probably no rational historian that says no killing of any kind out side of battle took place. Thank you for pointing that out. Some right wingers claim there was killing but it does not fit the definition of massacre, I don't know the details, but that sounds too much of justification for me. I personally feel that the truth is somewhere between extremes and I hope things become more clearer in the future, or China and Japan can get over this problem.
1 ( +1 / -0 )
According to the cite you showed, the distributor said ''We concluded that we had better avoid unnecessary confusion in the movie theaters,'. I think it is rational to think the distributor feared right wingers protesting near or inside the movie theater when this movie is showed. Similar thing happened with the movie "Yasukuni". I think these actions by radical right wingers are wrong. I think they have the right to criticize wrong part of the movie using proper freedom of speech, but not in a violent way. I don't know what right wingers were actually claiming, if they were claiming "Nanjing massacre did not happen at all, such a movie is not allowed in Japan" I am against them. But I am not eager to heavily criticize the distributors for I understand fear toward radical right wingers violent actions toward theaters. I think most of the Japanese people won't think such a violent way is a good thing even most of the conservatives would agree with this. The fact that the movie is highly rated in Japan is probably one of the evidence for that. But if right wingers were infuriated with the headshot scene, I think they have some legitimate reasons to be angry, even though that won't justify their violent way. And there are some people, not radical right wingers, who says the movie was basically good and was moved by it, but the headshot scene is something that disappointed them, when they knew the fact. I can understand this kind of criticism.
And it is true that Japanese Imperial government burned documents, but I think there is enough evidence that shows Nanjing massacre of some extent took place, though there is possibility that death toll might have been more clearer if documents had not been burned. But if the documents had remained, and if the death toll was actually not as high as what many Chinese medias or institutions are claiming, there is possibility that remaining documents might have actually worked well to some extent for Japan, not China. I think that is more likely because numbers like more than 300000 is probably the maximum estimate done that is not likely along with people who say numbers like 0 or few hundred.
0 ( +1 / -1 )
Some of your comments were really interesting to me. I agree with you to some extent that GHQ(or the US) is responsible for conflicts such as Takeshima/Dokdo and Senkaku/Daioyu. Especially the Takeshima/Dokdo issue, one of the main reason it is still becoming a conflict is that GHQ failed to draw clear line between Korea and Japan. If GHQ had clarified where it belongs, either korea or japan, problem would have been much smaller. Facing the threat from Soviets during the cold war, and wanting cooperation from both korea and japan, maybe the US did not want to irritate either side by clarifying its position. And the US today is pretending like they had nothing to do with it and telling korea and japan to calm down. I think that's one of the problem of GHQ rule.
But at the same time, the GHQ helped Japan come back from war devastation, and helped Japan get out of militarism, did many good reformations, so I think there were many good things GHQ did. Overall, I think GHQ did make some mistakes but did a good rule on Japan.
Also, the part where you said, Mussolini is praised by few of Italian politician today was interesting. I never knew about that.
0 ( +2 / -2 )
Jeff Lee I never knew the Japanese distributor deleted part of the movie "Last Emperor", so I checked about that on the internet, and you were right. But I also found out part of what you call "real footage" was not real, and that was what right wingers in Japan was angry at. The scene where Chinese are executed by headshots is show as part of Nanjing massacre but actually that scene was derived from "The Shanghi document"(1928) made by soviet and Germany. It was originally a scene depicting persecution of Chinese communists by Chinese nationalist party. Somebody uploaded the movie on youtube so you can watch it. Then the propaganda film made by the US during the pacific war called "The Battle of China"(1944), used the same scene as persecution of Chinese by Japanese army. And "Last Emperor" used that same scene to show Nanjing Massacre.
But that headshot part was just few seconds of the movie. If the Japanese distributor deleted 30 ~40seconds of the movie, I don't know whether other scenes of Japanese atrocities were real footage or not. If they deleted the real footage, they shouldn't have done that, and even if they are not using the real footage, maybe distributors should have left it to the market of free speech. In that way, the distributors should not have deleted the film, but at the same time, I think right wingers and conservatives are legitimate in criticizing at least the headshot scene. The DVD version of the movie in Japan includes deleted part, and the movie is generally highly rated in Japan.
1 ( +2 / -1 )
Edumund Fitzgerald "They are in the conservative camp, and reasonable, sensible conservatives need to be aware of who their "buddies" are so they can help us cut them out of politics." I agree with you. Reasonable conservatives should separate themselves from radical right wingers. And I also think reasonable good minded liberals should also stay away from people who are just expressing propagandas or from radical left wingers. But the problem that seems to exist is, radical right wingers tend to criticize all liberals as if they are brainwashed by propaganda, on the other hand, many left wingers tend to criticize any historical view different from them as revisionist view. There are sincerely good minded liberals, and I think there are historical view different from liberals and still not revisionism.
"See, there is no political group immune to the desire for revisionism." I also agree, but I think it is fair to say there are revisionist(in a different way) on both sides, liberals and conservatives.
0 ( +0 / -0 )
I agree with Teacher X.
When you show detailed depiction of dolphin hunting it is impulsive for sure, it works to your emotion. But when I watch documentary films of wild life, where predators are hunting down their preys, I feel the same emotional shock as watching dolphin hunting. Or when I see traditional hunters in Japan called matagi finishes lives of animals they hunted, I get shocked in the same way. They are all impulsive but obviously most people don't say latter two is evil(there are people who claim hunting is cruel but these matagi are hunting for their living). So whether the appearance of certain act impulsive or not does not necessarily decide whether it is evil or not but those against dolphin hunting seems to be connecting them.
0 ( +6 / -6 )
I think dolphin hunt can be ended, as long as people in Taiji can keep on make living with other things, and personally I have no problem with that.
However, for me that is not because dolphins are special., or not because Taiji people are inhumane. I cannot sympathize with those people who uses dirty words and criticizes people in Taiji as if they are barbarians. I think that is simply rude and arrogant. When dirty words, or provacative measures are used towards these people, it is quite normal for not all but some people to start sympathizing with fishermans in Taiji.
-3 ( +4 / -7 )
Is it the way they kill dolphins that matter? or is it the fact that they are killing dolphins that matter? or maybe both?
I agree that unnecessarily cruel way of killing dolphins should be avoided but it is hard for me to understand what is so special about dolphins. Maybe because dolphins are intelligent, beautiful, cute and does not attack human. Killing dolphins unnecessarily is human centered act but I also feel it is human centered discrimination that some people try to treat whales and dolphins differently from other animals. But if there is chance that these special concerns for dolphins are eventually going to spread to all the other animals in a proper way, I think there is meaning to love dolphins more.
Native Indians and Inuits and people in stone age probably respected nature more than many people living today. And I think they knew how to live with nature more than industrialized people. And many of them were hunting dolphins or whales for long time and probably received them as grace from nature.
-2 ( +4 / -6 )
I understood that there are mainly two problems with the dolphin hunting. But for the second problem, then is it ok for people in Taiji to keep on killing dolphins if they somehow find out the way to kill dolphins instantly without pain?
For the mercury problem, I think Japanese gov should do some restrictions if it is really causing serious health problems to people eating dolphin meat. But I also heard unless you eat too much of dolphins meat it is not harmful to health. I am not really sure but with quick search on the internet I could not find any specific examples of dolphin meat causing serious health problem in Japan, but there are just people claiming danger of dolphin meat( maybe I'm just ignorant).
Still I do not understand why those people against killing dolphins care so much about Japanese people's health who are eating dolphin's meat. For most of the Japanese people almost never eat dolphin's meat, including myself.
-1 ( +2 / -3 )
LowlyDec. 31, 2013 - 02:07PM JST
As I said before, people visiting Yasukuni are patriotic but does not mean that person is militarist or whitewashing war crimes. I would rather say that it is rude to compare all the visitors of Yasukuni with Neo Nazis or white supremacist. Some might be revisionist but many of them are pretty different from Neo-nazi. If you are to bring up group similar to Neo-Nazi in Japan, most similar one would be Zaitokukai. If Abe starts supporting Zaitokukai, that might be similar to US president supporting white supremacist. But visiting Yasukuni does not mean loving wars or militarism or warcrimes, but it means loving gods or dead soldiers enshrined there( but as I said some of them omits class A war criminals).
I also think Chinreisha is a good part of Yasukuni, If leaders are going to visit Yasukuni, they should go there, in my opinion. That's much better than just visiting the main shrine. If you are saying visit to Yasukuni is not good because it causes conflicts with kr and CN, it is true to some extent. But if Abe thinks he can explain well and gain understanding from other nations in a long run, visiting shrine might be one of his options. But it is in some part, political decision so, it might be more complicated than this.
0 ( +1 / -1 )
I am not sure if Yasukuni is putting Hitler and Jewish in Chinreisya, I just thought if that is the case that is interesting. I was always curious but what if any christian or new agers says God, detests the deeds of Hitler, but loves Hitler just like he loves Jewish people, is that insulting to Jewish? How about the traditional idea of shinto(not state shinto), that everybody who dies become gods no matter what. According to this belief, class A war criminals, and victims in Asia all become gods. Or what about some of the Christians or Muslims who say you have to believe in Jesus of Allah to be saved, according to this idea, most of the people who died in Hiroshima were not saved, is this insulting people in Hiroshima? Or maybe it matters only when the leaders of former aggressor nations claims he believe in such an religion?
I don't know whether these ideas are insulting to victims of the war but I agree with you that if any religious ideas are used to justify or whitewash wrong doings, then that is clearly insulting people. I believe there are revisionists in Japan, and some of them are probably going to yasukuni. If Abe is one of those I think he is wrong. I am not a shintoist, and I don't want to go to Yasukuni just like you. If Japanese people start saying "if you are Japanese you should visit Yasukuni," I will hate that idea, but I also don't care if people voluntarily go to Yasukuni just to mourn for the deads.
Putting all the people's name on the church's list may be selfish, but I won't care much as long as they stay away from me, and all the people's names are listed and not just my name.
-1 ( +0 / -1 )
banz10 Yes Ishihara said it. I have read it in an article in Japanese and I was surprised. I think even most of the Japanese don't know about this. Probably it is a matter of faith, I don't know.
Not only leftists but rightists and conservatives usually admits that Japanese leaders at that time did make mistakes, but they probably disagree on which part they made a mistake.
I don't know if there is anybody who claims class A war criminals do not have any responsibility at all and Japan is a just a victim and did nothing wrong. But if there is such a person, my opinion is he/she is a revisionist.
Yes Abe's grandfather was a A class war criminal, but he was not executed and realesed later and was able to become a prime minister probably you know. so If I were Abe I won't hate GHQ for that. But I do not know what Abe is really thinking because I am not Abe, but criticizing him as militarist for just visiting yasukuni seems too excessive to me. what is important, in my opinion, is what he really wants to do with Japan or what he really is thinking, I cannot know much about his thinking by just his vists to Yasukuni. Koizumi and Nakasone visited Yasukuni before but I don't think they were really trying to whitewash wrong doings or trying to make japan militaristic.
0 ( +2 / -2 )
banz10 Thank you for your reply.
Yes infact, there are those who think class A war criminals should be removed from Yasukuni, even among those who visit yasukuni. One famous example I know is Ishihara( former Tokyo mayor). He says, when he goes to Yasukuni, he intentionally omits those class A war criminals and pray for others. Because class A war criminals inflicted tremendous damages to Japan. So even among yasukuni visitors, there are different views.
The view that I have explained before, claims because all the Japanese people are responsible to some extent for the war, it is "hypocrisy" to place all responsibility to war criminals. Funny thing is I kind of understand both views, they both has some point, but they seem to contradict with each other.
I agree Chinreisya is interesting. Yasukuni does not give details of who exactly is enshrined in Chinreisya, but if they are enshrining people like Hitler, and at the same time Jewish people killed in Holocaust then Chinreisya have interesting idea based on total equality. Treating all the dead equally no matter what.. That is interesting idea. But I don't know if this is true.
0 ( +2 / -2 )
One of the view held by people visiting Yasukuni, and was interesting was that, ordinary Japanese people are to some extent responsible for starting the war. Most of the people are to be held responsible for the war.. Therefore we should treat all of them equally.
Also there is Chinreisya in Yasukuni. Not widely known. It is a small shrine that honors all the war dead around the world. Not just Japanese, but also Americans Germany Koreans, Chinese etc. Medias do not tell much but Abe also prayed at Chinreisya when he visited Yasukuni. I think if people are visiting Yasukuni, they should also visit Chinreisya, and Yasukuni Shrine should take good care of that small shrine.
-2 ( +3 / -5 )
About your "revisionist's" statements. (1)and(4) are dealing with the same issue. I don't know how much you know about comfort women but what I know and think about comfort women is that there was such a system of comfort women and I believe most right wingers or conservatives and even Abe or Ishihara won't deny about that because that is obvious from historical documents that such a thing existed. and I believe Japanese gov played a role in establishing brothels. But there is NO documents found that shows Japanese gov ordered to recruit comfort women by physical force. Please tell me if I am wrong. If you know these facts, this is what Hashimoto or Abe is talking about. I believe there were soldiers who forcibly took women from villages or raped women on foreign land and that is a war crime by individuals, and I don't think Hashimoto or Abe is denying these cases. If they are, then I agree with you, Hashimoto is whitewashing warcrimes. I also know some Korean women were deceived to work as comfort women by (not Japanese military but by the ) contractors in Korea. That should be called something like deception and the word coercion is inappropriate because it gives false impression to the fact.
About (2)and(4). Kawamura made a justification of statements later and said, he meant number of casutalties such as 400,000 is too much and that such number of death did not exist is what he meant. I don't know what kawamura really meant at heart but Ishihara supported him by saying the same thing. Even those who are considered rightist do not say no civilians were killed in Nanjing most of them disagree on number of casualties. If you are going to call these people revisionist then there should be concrete evidence that 400,000 people were killed but I think proving that is almost impossible today.
About (5). On this part I agree with you that Tamogami might be a revisionist on some part. Because he seems to emphasize and look at only good parts of imperial Japan and sometimes take minority view to justify Japan. At least he should have mentioned the bad side of Imperial Japan. If Japanese are to really honor war dead, we should sincerely learn what was wrong with Japan at that time, or else sacrifice of their lives become meaningless. But this does not mean, we should take the same historical views with Koreans or Chinese. Because if Koreans or Chinese views are incorrect and if we believe their views blindly, we cannot face what really happened and thus cannot learn from the history.
-6 ( +2 / -8 )