• davel@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      5 months ago

      Fascist Japan never really ended. If you look at who the US allowed into positions of power after Japan’s unconditional surrender, you’ll see it was largely the same government, but as a US client state.

        • rottingleaf@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          5 months ago

          How different was East Germany in your opinion?

          Their 4 “allowed” political parties included 1 moderately Nazi.

          Also USSR supported the so-called Socialist Imperial Party in West Germany, until it was banned there. Well, that’s only few years, so.

          • electric_nan@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            5 months ago

            I’m not familiar tbh. I just learned about how lots of Nazis remained or were placed in politically powerful positions by the west, often out of a desire to suppress communism.

            • rottingleaf@lemmy.zip
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              5 months ago

              Yes, that thing was particular to West Germany.

              East Germany had lots of the same in its bureaucratic and generally not very “political” parts. Its politicians, yes, didn’t include that kind of people. But unlike mother USSR it had a facade of pluralism, where one of the allowed parties was, again, very close to moderate Nazis.

              • electric_nan@lemmy.ml
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                5 months ago

                Interesting. I could only imagine this as a kind of controlled opposition, but I’d be interested in learning more about it.

      • IndustryStandard@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        5 months ago

        Japan never really had an uprising though. It’s weird that they went from American enemy number one to super friendly in like 30 years. But I’m not very educated on this subject so feel free to correct me here.

          • LeroyJenkins@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            5 months ago

            for those who don’t want to go through wiki articles, what he means is essentially after wwii, the US was like o shit communism. better be friends with Japan so we can install a bunch of army bases so we can have control in that area. Japan, ravaged by war, was just like… ok. which is why they get a lot of passes in western society for the shit they pulled in history. the end.

    • Rachelhazideas@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      5 months ago

      I think these kinds of comments are harmful to the discourse because there a good deal of nuance missing.

      For one, it’s pretty reductive to call them ‘Japanese who’ve done bad things’ when who you’re talking about is dead or on their death beds. That’s not who the monument is for or about.

      Historical monuments aren’t for attributing the sins of grandparents to their grandchildren. It’s about humanzing the victims and teaching people of this generation what was allowed to happen in the past. It’s about teaching them the dangers of complacency and the complicit nature of being a bystander.

      If it’s worth anything, 4,300 people signed a petition against the removal and many protested in person.

      Yes, Japanese people as a whole are severely lacking when it comes to acknowledging the atrocities committed by their country. No, Japanese people today are not personally responsible for them. The better we are at separating acknowledgement from responsibility, the easier time we will have convincing people to remember them.

      • nekandro@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        5 months ago

        This would be valid if Japan didn’t continue to deny their role in atrocities. The Japanese people of today are entirely responsible for the lack of recognition of their role in the atrocities of yesterday.

      • rwhitisissle@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        5 months ago

        I think the person you’re responding to already knows that and the implication of “the bad things they’ve done” is that they mean “the bad things their nation has done.” It’s a problem that Japan seems to have more than other nations because it’s historically made a big show of its status as the only nation to ever suffer the use of nuclear weapons, and has plenty of memorials and museums to remember the event, while militantly denying, internally and externally, its own history of incredible violence and cruelty towards neighboring countries.

      • Kecessa@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        5 months ago

        You’re over analysing things for no reasons as my choice of word is perfectly appropriate when you take half a second to figure out the context.