In
early November, renowned novelist Haruki Murakami spoke to the
Mainichi Shimbun criticizing Japan's revisionism over World War II
and comparing it to the government secrecy over Fukushima. He will
now no doubt face the usual hollow death threats from right-wing
groups more interested in publicizing themselves than actually
harming anyone. It will also be interesting to see how much air time
he gets for this from a media notoriously afraid of rocking the boat.
Japan Inc. faces quite a dilemma: what to do with a Nobel-winning
national hero who says something so...unpatriotic?
The
reason that Murakami openly condemning the past is such a big deal,
is that so few prominent figures in Japan have shown such courage.
In the early days of Japan's democracy there was an effort to address
the wrongs of the past, evidenced in the San
Francisco treaty of 1951, where Japan agreed to pay compensation to
Asian nations that had suffered from its aggression. Back then
college curricula e did not shy away from wartime atrocities.
But
as Japan solidified into a virtual one-party state under the LDP, a
backlash against the truth began. MacArthur's occupation never
'de-Nazified' the government. Bureaucrats with much needed expertise
from before the war were left in place, and they kept their old
ideas. Politicians simply changed hats and ran for office in the new
Japan. This ensured that a nationalist streak ran through the new
government and the ruling elite now had the confidence to take on
Japan's Imperial
past – and bury it.
The
denials started even as Nanking burned. One General Iwane, noted for
his straight-laced opposition to harming civilians, was quietly
removed from the area. The sixties and seventies were littered with
the careers of those who ran afoul of the new revisionism.
Journalists who exposed Japan's wartime atrocities – such as
Katsuichi Honda and Tomio Hora - were threatened and slurred.
Academics were demoted or dismissed. Apologists
gained in confidence and stature, seeking to undermine the facts and
present a romanticized ideal of Japan's Imperial wartime role.
The
vernacular of modern propaganda is the same as during the war itself:
liberation, modernization, co-prosperity and freedom from 'Western
tyranny'. Over the decades such euphemisms have seeped into
education, along with the censorship of any texts that dare explain
the atrocities as they really were. Even the most irrefutable of
admissions has been rebranded. Japan's military presence China can
hardly be denied, after all it was a Japanese army in Manchuria not
the other way around. But this was famously termed in one standard
textbook an 'advance' as opposed to the obvious 'invasion'. Only in
a war of 'liberation' from a vague third party could the rapine and
slaughter of outright invasion be dismissed as a mere military
maneuver.
Coupled
with such denials, for several generations, Japanese school children
have learned by rote a series of mantras that define their
understanding of Japan's role in the world. We've all heard them
from no-doubt well-meaning Japanese seeking to educate the foreigner:
Japan is a peaceful country; it is a very small country; our
ancestors were farmers and yours were hunters. Hiroshima's peace dome
is held up as a beacon to that lights the way to a peaceful future,
free of nuclear weapons. Such ingrained conceptions serve to color
the Japanese view of the past.
When
students grow old enough to ask questions, not only has their
education conditioned them against questioning authority, but it has
plowed a field ripe for denial. How do the Japanese square away the
brutality of Nanking, the viciousness of enslaving women for sex or
the horrors of Unit 731, when they have heard all their lives that
peaceful little Japan is committed to just the opposite?
In
steps the media, led by the government mouthpiece NHK, to explain it
away: these are just pernicious foreign lies spread by jealous rivals
China and Korea; the rest of Asia is envious of Japan's success; the
comfort women just greedy old prostitutes. There is no need to
examine the evidence or even attempt to refute it. Politicians and a
pliant media simply repeat a whole new mantra until everyone believes
it – that there is no evidence to begin with.
Though
the retreating Japanese military authorities managed to destroy much
of the records that covered atrocities, hundreds of documents have
survived along with the testimonies of many victims, witnesses and
perpetrating soldiers. These remain available in government and
university archives. But with the tight lipped media marching in
lockstep and authority figures such as Governor Ishihara, Mayor
Hashimoto and even some cabinet-level ministers repeating the mantra
that there is no evidence, the average citizen can be forgiven for
not looking it up.
That
such world figures as US President Barack Obama have called on Japan
to acknowledge the past gets only a passing mention. That western
victims of Japan's aggression in Asia - including comfort women –
have come forward too, is usually ignored. This is all about China
and Korea baiting Japan for their own domestic purposes. Peaceful
little Japan is a victim again. And how can today's victim have been
yesterday's aggressor? Such questions were easily answered before
the revisionists got their hands on the textbooks.
Why
then Murakami and why now? He clearly sees parallels between the
historical cover up of the war and the current opaqueness surrounding
the Fukushima disaster. Looking to the pre-war years, it is no
doubt apparent that denial of truths and a complicit media are not
just stumbling blocks to progress but a slippery slope toward
authoritarianism
– the kind that got Japan in trouble in the past.
Murakami
knows that he speaks out at the risk of censure and slander, but as
Japan's most celebrated novelist and an internationally renowned
intellectual, he at least has a platform. Small wonder that more
people of his stature and celebrity do not come forward to speak
truth to power. Thanks to the efforts of the establishment over the
past fifty years, precious few have even heard the truth to begin
with.
In
early November, renowned novelist Haruki Murakami spoke to the
Mainichi Shimbun criticizing Japan's revisionism over World War II
and comparing it to the government secrecy over Fukushima. He will
now no doubt face the usual hollow death threats from right-wing
groups more interested in publicizing themselves than actually
harming anyone. It will also be interesting to see how much air time
he gets for this from a media notoriously afraid of rocking the boat.
Japan Inc. faces quite a dilemma: what to do with a Nobel-winning
national hero who says something so...unpatriotic?
The
reason that Murakami openly condemning the past is such a big deal,
is that so few prominent figures in Japan have shown such courage.
In the early days of Japan's democracy there was an effort to address
the wrongs of the past, evidenced in the San
Francisco treaty of 1951, where Japan agreed to pay compensation to
Asian nations that had suffered from its aggression. Back then
college curricula e did not shy away from wartime atrocities.
But
as Japan solidified into a virtual one-party state under the LDP, a
backlash against the truth began. MacArthur's occupation never
'de-Nazified' the government. Bureaucrats with much needed expertise
from before the war were left in place, and they kept their old
ideas. Politicians simply changed hats and ran for office in the new
Japan. This ensured that a nationalist streak ran through the new
government and the ruling elite now had the confidence to take on
Japan's Imperial
past – and bury it.
The
denials started even as Nanking burned. One General Iwane, noted for
his straight-laced opposition to harming civilians, was quietly
removed from the area. The sixties and seventies were littered with
the careers of those who ran afoul of the new revisionism.
Journalists who exposed Japan's wartime atrocities – such as
Katsuichi Honda and Tomio Hora - were threatened and slurred.
Academics were demoted or dismissed. Apologists
gained in confidence and stature, seeking to undermine the facts and
present a romanticized ideal of Japan's Imperial wartime role.
The
vernacular of modern propaganda is the same as during the war itself:
liberation, modernization, co-prosperity and freedom from 'Western
tyranny'. Over the decades such euphemisms have seeped into
education, along with the censorship of any texts that dare explain
the atrocities as they really were. Even the most irrefutable of
admissions has been rebranded. Japan's military presence China can
hardly be denied, after all it was a Japanese army in Manchuria not
the other way around. But this was famously termed in one standard
textbook an 'advance' as opposed to the obvious 'invasion'. Only in
a war of 'liberation' from a vague third party could the rapine and
slaughter of outright invasion be dismissed as a mere military
maneuver.
Coupled
with such denials, for several generations, Japanese school children
have learned by rote a series of mantras that define their
understanding of Japan's role in the world. We've all heard them
from no-doubt well-meaning Japanese seeking to educate the foreigner:
Japan is a peaceful country; it is a very small country; our
ancestors were farmers and yours were hunters. Hiroshima's peace dome
is held up as a beacon to that lights the way to a peaceful future,
free of nuclear weapons. Such ingrained conceptions serve to color
the Japanese view of the past.
When
students grow old enough to ask questions, not only has their
education conditioned them against questioning authority, but it has
plowed a field ripe for denial. How do the Japanese square away the
brutality of Nanking, the viciousness of enslaving women for sex or
the horrors of Unit 731, when they have heard all their lives that
peaceful little Japan is committed to just the opposite?
In
steps the media, led by the government mouthpiece NHK, to explain it
away: these are just pernicious foreign lies spread by jealous rivals
China and Korea; the rest of Asia is envious of Japan's success; the
comfort women just greedy old prostitutes. There is no need to
examine the evidence or even attempt to refute it. Politicians and a
pliant media simply repeat a whole new mantra until everyone believes
it – that there is no evidence to begin with.
Though
the retreating Japanese military authorities managed to destroy much
of the records that covered atrocities, hundreds of documents have
survived along with the testimonies of many victims, witnesses and
perpetrating soldiers. These remain available in government and
university archives. But with the tight lipped media marching in
lockstep and authority figures such as Governor Ishihara, Mayor
Hashimoto and even some cabinet-level ministers repeating the mantra
that there is no evidence, the average citizen can be forgiven for
not looking it up.
That
such world figures as US President Barack Obama have called on Japan
to acknowledge the past gets only a passing mention. That western
victims of Japan's aggression in Asia - including comfort women –
have come forward too, is usually ignored. This is all about China
and Korea baiting Japan for their own domestic purposes. Peaceful
little Japan is a victim again. And how can today's victim have been
yesterday's aggressor? Such questions were easily answered before
the revisionists got their hands on the textbooks.
Why
then Murakami and why now? He clearly sees parallels between the
historical cover up of the war and the current opaqueness surrounding
the Fukushima disaster. Looking to the pre-war years, it is no
doubt apparent that denial of truths and a complicit media are not
just stumbling blocks to progress but a slippery slope toward
authoritarianism
– the kind that got Japan in trouble in the past.
Murakami
knows that he speaks out at the risk of censure and slander, but as
Japan's most celebrated novelist and an internationally renowned
intellectual, he at least has a platform. Small wonder that more
people of his stature and celebrity do not come forward to speak
truth to power. Thanks to the efforts of the establishment over the
past fifty years, precious few have even heard the truth to begin
with.
No comments:
Post a Comment
No offensive language, racial or religious slurs, please. Moderator has first and final say on edited/deleted content.