Unfortunately, places like China and other non-democratic states don’t allow this freedom of information. Is it restricted in Japan? I doubt it, though there may not be alot of material written in Japanese, I’m not sure.

Next to having textbooks that are fair, balanced and relativley objective, I think the best scenario for a history education in any country is one in which a wide variety of materials are freely and widely available-one of the great things about the internet. I highly doubt this is the case in China and I’m not even sure if it’s true in Korea (which seems to be over-run with leftist slants on history-in the present times anyway, and as students are regularly taught (brainwashed) in school by the far leftist teachers unions).

It is often claimed that the US ignores the bad things it has done, but if one wants to find information, there’s a hell of alot out there covering the gamut of political opinions.

The history of 1937 Nanjing has been skewed by Chinese government control of history books and their promotion of the Massacre Museum, which is a travesty filled with fake photos and individual (and uncorroborated) accounts. History isn’t printed in a book, but is the truthful and objective result of open scrutiny and debate. And when it comes to this time in history, there is a dearth of hard evidence. People didn’t have ID cards then. There weren’t people sneaking shots with digital cameras. To piece together an objective and clear history from the leftover scraps of such a backward and confusing period would be near impossible.

In the end it’s all about ideology. Having been to Japan for six weeks, I can attest that the mainstream of Japanese society does not worship violence. Having lived in Nanjing for five years, I cannot say as much about China. I am concerned about militarism here, and that’s not just from a political angle or what I see on the news. I think the Chinese and Japanese (to a lesser extent) could do more to root violence out of its culture. Let’s get China and Japan working together economically, making individual friendships, studying each others’ cultural greatness. In just a couple generations this whole “history” thing would just be blood under the bridge.

The fact that these discussions about Japan are always crowded means there you can find some who can’t help being obsessed by the harsh memory they learned in youth.

As you say, take it easy and find out the truth.

http://www.taipeitimes.com/News/editorials/archives/2005/11/24/2003281531

If Japan’s collective mindset shifts from being a model pacifist nation to being one where past aggressions and atrocities are downplayed, justified as necessary for Japanese security, or not learned, while shedding the pacifist constitution in favor of being a “normal country,” then I think it’s highly possible.

I worry that the right-wing is seeking to strip away, slowly but deliberately, what has made Japan a model nation (and a very good neighbor, for the most part) that is not a threat to its neighbors.

That they’re going to invade again? You have to be out of your mind.

I think it’s a real possibility that an erstwhile “pacifist” Japan that has turned itself into what is being touted as a “normal country” (i.e., re-militarized country) could be involved in something that sparks into a wider conflict. Do I think they’re going to invade Seoul again? No. One of the several disputed areas, if a newly empowered militarist-minded government thinks they have the decisive upper hand? Yes.

Mind you, a militarist Japan in the future is not my only concern. China of now and probably for the foreseeable future is a bigger worry, to Korea, to Taiwan, to its southern neighbors, and to Japan (one of the reasons why Taiwan, Japan, and South Korea all need to maintain a strong alliance with the U.S.).

As has been said earlier the only danger for the region is China’s irredentism. That’s fact.

Right now? Yes. As the 1924 piece demonstrates, things can change.

I asked at Japundit.com if the Big Brother-esque smart cards designed to keep an eye on the crime-prone gaijin has given any of the supporters of right-wing Japan any cause for concern, since they seem now to be targeted.

And some forums, such as Marmot’s, are widely read by some influential people here in Korea, so there is a chance to influence other people’s thinking, as much as to be influenced by people you should pay attention to. Although maybe I should just get back to writing more op-ed pieces, though.

I think this is a very valid point. What I would like to see from this is that China becomes infected with a sense that textbooks, and not just Japanese textbooks, should be written as objectively and agenda-free as possible.

Having said that, I would also like to point out that it’s rather interesting that defenders of the right-wing positions point so heavily to the absence of Chinese contrition about Chinese atrocities against Chinese people to counter criticism about an alleged lack of Japanese contrition (in these textbooks) about Japanese atrocities against people in other countries.

Lack of proper behavior on Beijing’s part does not justify lack of proper behavior on the Japanese side. But even if it did, remove the PRC completely from the picture and would this ‘argument’ hold up against South Korea?

The post-military era, especially since Kim Daejung, has led to a major overhaul of certain topics, especially those involving Korean atrocities against Koreans (e.g., Cheju in 1948, Kwangju in 1980, handling of student protests and the democracy movement, and summary executions of suspected Communists during and after the Korean War).

South Korea has far, far less than the PRC to be contrite about, but it has dealt with this. Korea textbooks are no model of virtue, but unlke Chinese textbooks, at least they deal with nasty shit Koreans did to Koreans just as they deal with nasty shit Japanese did to Koreans.

In other words, with China out of the picture, defenders of the Japanese right-wing would have no more “Why complain that we killed millions of people when you won’t admit that you killed millions of people?” argument.

The complaint that Koreans don’t talk enough about being collaborators, while a defensible position, is like comparing shoplifting a candy bar to Enron-levels of wrongdoing.

By the way, have there been any significant Taiwanese complaints about the textbooks this year?

“But that doesn’t mean that Chinese people can’t have a valid point. One can be a massive hypocrite and still be factually correct about something or someone else.”

Yes, but sayings like “the pot calling the kettle black” illustrate that people will not listen to or take seriously someone who complains about something they themselves are guilty of.

Chinese textbooks are written by the state authorities. and Chinese people have no control over the content. Individual Chinese have a right to express opinions about the Japanese textbooks, but the Chinese government does not. Well, it can express an opinion if it wants, but an appropriate Japanese response would be to take a page out of the CCP international diplomacy playbook, “Quit interfering in our internal affairs.”

Hang on Curzon, that wasn’t what my comments were about. My point was that responding to Chinese criticisms of Japanese textbooks by pointing to the shortcomings of Chinese textbooks is pointless. Same for the Korean childrens drawings you linked to. Look, I had a 7 seven year old Chinese student idly telling her friend that foreigners belong in the trash. I asked her nicely to repeat that and she corrected herself – all Japanese belong in the trash, not the nice American teacher. Then she and her friend explained that Japanese people are evil warmongers, etc. etc.

I have more stories like that. But that’s irrelevant to a discussion of what should be in Japanese textbooks. These are two separate issues. Is there hypocrisy and irony involved? Hell yes. But that doesn’t mean that Chinese people can’t have a valid point. One can be a massive hypocrite and still be factually correct about something or someone else.

To engage in that sort of refutation is to not respond to the criticism directly, but really to engage in a sort of ad hominem attack, since it calls character into question without examining the facts.

The textbook, to me, doesn’t look very damning in and of itself. This is, however, in the eye of the beholder. Like I said before, people can criticize your book for not emphasizing things according to their moral scale. One persons scale will say Mao was more heinous because he hurt his own people. Another person would say that is less heinous than invasion because at least it stays in the family (weird to me, but some people really believe that). There will always people with different weights and balances on these issues, and textbooks will always be subject to this sort of criticism. Some times it will be egregious enough to warrant changes, some times not. That’s a group compromise.

However, when a textbook doesn’t engage in strong moral condemnation in a context where the Yasukuni museum ends with a big portrait of Justice Radhabinod Pal, who claimed Japan was innocent and the real criminals were British and American imperialists, in a context where public political figures have underplayed and even denied some of the atrocities, where Tojo’s granddaughter is actually listened to when she tries to justify Unit 731; when a textbook is does not engage in condemnation in this context of other messages in the same society about the same topic, then it does become more worrisome.

Curzon, I also think you need to be more precise when talking about China. Too often you seem to lump together the Chinese people and the Chinese government. Just as you would seek for people not to stereotype Japan, you should make sure you don’t open yourself to the same criticism because you weren’t precise.

And it’s davesgonechina, not davedoeschina, which is my porn name.

I have studied Japan and its culture for many years. I have deep admiration for Japanese culture. Being against Nazis doesn’t make somebody an “anti-German bigot”. And if you believe Japan is a democracy, please look up the definition of “one-party state”.

Post-communist China will be extraordinarily dangerous.”â��?the authoritarian regime will no longer be able to keep its beligerent populace in check.

It seems obvious from his choice of name and his attitude, that Curzon is bigoted against the “uppity” nations of the world, like China and India, who have smashed colonialism. But this statement takes this neo-imperialism to new racist heights.

China is a vast country with a vast culture. It will recover from the ravages of its tragic modern history. You cannot doom the Chinese people to a future of darkness just because of a few street protests and hooliganism. Taiwan shows that the Chinese people can govern themselves democratically.

To Sun bin, kushibo and others trying to argue here: just give it up. The pro-Meiji apologists are in a fantasy-land custom made for them by the Japanese right. They’ll have to find their own way out.

Well, that shows that Chinese territorial claims predate 1949. As far as I know, Taiwan has not used force to stake its claims, but the PRC snatched the Paracels from Vietnam in 1979.

What is that difference?