From: davidg@aegis.or.jp (Dave McLane)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.japan
Subject: Re: An open letter to the Emperor Akihito of Japa
Date: 29 Aug 92 00:53:05 GMT
Organization: Aegis Society, Kyoto Japan

miklg@acuson.com (Michael Goldman ) writes:

>davidg@aegis.or.jp (Dave McLane) writes:

>>jwb@capek.rdt.monash.edu.au (Jim Breen) writes:

>>>A disinterested study of the history of that area  leads one, IMHO, to the
>>>inescapable conclusion that the Japanese oligarchy was hell-bent on "intruding" on
>>>China from before the Sino-Japanese war of the 1890s, and that the "Peking Incident"
>>>was just one of the many manufactured precedents to provide justification.

>>Since you are claiming inescable conclusions based on history, would
>>you supply us some references? 

>	Since I can't email to you, I have to post this.  Did my recent 2 part
>	series on the Russo-Japanese war not reach your mail distribution?
>	I had thought that was a reasonably well-supported argument that Japan
>	was expansionist from 1868 on.  If it did reach you, was there some
>	credibility problem?  My limited experience in Japan is that the
>	libraries and book stores have reasonable English language sections,
>	so I would think that any book by an academic historian would provide
>	you with some sources.

Yes, it did and sorry if you felt I was ignoring your post because I
didn't post a reply. I've been terribly busy with other projects.

As for sources in English langauge sections, when I checked a couple
of years ago at Kinokuniya in Osaka I could only find 3 paperbacks.
I chose //Japan: The Story of a Nation// by Reischauer and while it
does have have a well-supported argument that Japan was expansionist
for quite some time before WW II, and while there have been articles
in the Japan Times by Japanese nationals saying the WW II didn't
start with Pearl Harbor but 10 years before, IMHO, this does NOT
lead to the *inescapable* conclusion that the Japanese oligarchy was
hell-bent on "intruding" on China. 

I have drawn no conclusion either way but I don't believe the
conclusion you have drawn is inescapable. This is not to say that
the physical actions weren't there, but was this "hell-bent on
intruding" or "doing their best to not become yet-another colony"? 

Although, I have only talked face-to-face with a relatively
insignificant number of people who believe the latter, (note my use
of 'believe': not 'opinion based upon evidence', but 'firm religious
faith'). But that is their interpretation of Japan's actions. 

Further, they say that since Japan Inc. (whatever that is) needs
trading partners, the endless statements with multiple-meanings as
to Japan's part in WW II are useful. They allow the people who
believe Japan waged a just war to continue to hold their beliefs,
and it allows the people who believe that Japan was the evil-empire
of the time. 

This may be an unusual idea and take some time to get used to. It
took me a long time to put aside ideas I learned as a child and
listen to how other people interpret these same events. And when I
did, I found they made as much sense as anything else.
Note that this is not to say that it *is* one way or the other, just
to say that I think it's quite realistic to assume that various
people will interpret the same events quite differently. 

Dave

--
Dave McLane 
JUNET: davidg@aegis.or.jp (ONLY within Japan: post otherwise)
Nagaokakyoshi, Kyoto Japan Tel: +81-75-951-1168 Fax: +81-75-957-1087
Newsgroups: soc.culture.japan