Nanjing! Nanjing!

[gato]

I don't have a disagreement with you on the history, though I think more research is needed in the specifics in order to rebut the deniers. Ran Yunfei has said that there is a very little research done in China on this history. Certainly there should be more to lay out the facts.

Since I don't read Japanese, I have to rely on English sources for information about the Japanese deniers. Here's what wikipedia has to say. The deniers are a minority, though they may be vocal.

http://en.wikipedia....anking_Massacre

Although the Japanese government has admitted to the acts of killing of a large number of noncombatants, looting and other violence committed by the Imperial Japanese Army after the fall of Nanking,[9][10] a small but vocal minority within both the Japanese government and society have argued that the death toll was military in nature and that no such crimes ever occurred. Denial of the massacre (and a divergent array of revisionist accounts of the killings) has become a staple of Japanese nationalism.[11] In Japan, public opinion of the massacres varies, and few deny the occurrence of the massacre outright.[11] Nonetheless, recurring attempts by negationists to promote a revisionist history of the incident have created controversy that periodically reverberates in the international media, particularly in China, South Korea, and other East Asian nations.

I don't believe that there is an equivalence between what the Japanese did to the Chinese and the Nazis did to the Jews. There was no Japanese plan for the extermination of the Chinese. Japan wanted to colonize China. There is a difference. But it's not something I want to spend that much time on debating. I care more about what's happening today, including the colonization that's happening today (maybe we'll leave Tibet to another thread).

What I am interested in is the change in China's policy towards Japan from the 1980s and the 1990s. Deng Xiaoping's quote of "过去的事情就让它过去" during his visit to Japan in 1978 was his framework for Japan policy. I'd like to get a response to this change.

[Outofin]

Wow, so relieved.

Since our long trustworthy skylee got some hard feeling with mainlander tourists, I feel this forum is so unfriendly. Yes, our old gato is a bit anti-government, (well, who isn't! ) but gato is still a reasonable person!

I don't believe the government is fanning the flames of hatred. I can testify by saying that when I read the news without seeing any other commentators or propaganda, my flame of hatred was already burning bright. The government tried to play down the incident of Nagoya major misbehavior. But I agree the Chinese are among the most nationalist people in the world, the other few include the Americans and the Indians if I remember correctly. Europe is the model to follow.

[skylee]

What have I done? Why was I mentioned here?

[Outofin]

Because I feel every post is more stylish with your name in it.

[yialanliu]

What I am interested in is the change in China's policy towards Japan from the 1980s and the 1990s. Deng Xiaoping's quote of "过去的事情就让它过去" during his visit to Japan in 1978 was his framework for Japan policy. I'd like to get a response to this change.

Threre's a major difference between letting things drop and having the Japanese start spreading lies that what happened in Nanjing never occured.

How can you let that drop? I'd be pretty pissed if a mayor in Germany started saying Holocaust never occured. I think people have the right to be angry if that happened especially if you were in the culture/group that was affected. I am not even Jewish and I think if the mayor of Munich or something said that I'd be awfully pissed.

Next, please be careful about what you link and don't take things out of context.

There was no mention about China not doing enough research on this topic at all. He just said that the MFA didn't want discussion on this topic right now. There are multitude of reasons for this including trying to not bring it in the spotlight as spoken by Deng. Now that probably isn't the reason but not allowing discussion does not mean there isn't research going on.

300,000?” The government can’t provide this, not even 10 percent of it. Why? Because Chinese governments don’t value an individual life. It’s true. After 70 years they’ve only accounted for 10,000. That’s because they don’t care about individuals.

Statements like that make him one of the most questionable sources available on this topic.

There was no Japanese plan for the extermination of the Chinese. Japan wanted to colonize China. There is a difference.

Next, colonization is the term they use. That doesn't mean that there wasn't a massacre. The Nazis had a very noble goal. They wanted utopia by getting rid of people with bad genes. Likewise, colonization doesn't automatically exonerate people. It's a massacre. Wehtehr or not the reason is justified is another debate but you can't say it is not a massacre of innocent human beings much like the Jews. In Nanjing, they killed everyone left in the city, if you were Chinese, you'd be dead. That doesn't sound like colonization to me. That's slaughter.

Don't make what happened a play on words and justify this as colonization. This is about people being killed and there should be no justification for this. The method is just plain wrong.

Also, what's the point of making such a loaded remark and not want discussion on it. You better defend this phrase because that is EXTREMELY OFFENSIVE.

[gato]

There was no mention about China not doing enough research on this topic at all.

He did mention it.

http://www.nybooks.com/blogs/nyrblog/2012/mar/02/learning-how-argue-interview-ran-yunfei/

This is why academics are so looked down upon by ordinary people. That’s why they’re called “barbarian teachers” (教兽 ). You think about it. The Japanese can still deny the Nanjing Massacre because intellectuals in China just work for the government. They’re political. The truth is that the standard work on the Nanjing Massacre was done by a Japanese intellectual, Kasahara Tokushi, not a Chinese. What Chinese has published anything of value on the Nanjing Massacre? I said this yesterday on (the microblog) Weibo: “Hey you intellectuals, the Japanese have done the only worthwhile work on the Nanjing Massacre and you still dare to call yourself patriotic?”

[yialanliu]

That was an opinion with no facts to back it up. At least the quote I mentioned was the government saying they should stop people talking about Nanjing Massacre.

His opinion is just an opinion. And with the way he vocalizes his opinion, I find them to be something more wrong than right. The Chinese have done a lot, there's a memorial, people know about it etc.. The Japanese don't even teach this in textbooks.

But Gato, you MUST defend yourself or APOLOGIZE for that comment. That's a horrible comment to make. You can't just make a comment saying the Nanjing Massacre cannot be compared to Nazi Germany. At least Germany had a noble idea behind it. Japan did it for sport with no overarching grand view that what they are doing is better for mankind. Both are equally wrong and disturbing and it is offensive you feel that because they call it colonization, it isn't bad.

There is no difference in the way they took lives away from people. Colonization is not a defense of what happened.

[gato]

Here's what I wrote:

I don't believe that there is an equivalence between what the Japanese did to the Chinese and the Nazis did to the Jews. There was no Japanese plan for the extermination of the Chinese. Japan wanted to colonize China. There is a difference. But it's not something I want to spend that much time on debating.

"Colonization" refers to Japan's plan to emulate the Europeans in having colonies all over Asia. I don't think that's in dispute.

[yialanliu]

Japan wanted to colonize. Where did colonization = killing everyone. The fact that they killed without discrimination is a genocide and is the same as what the Nazis did.

[abcdefg]

I went to Nanjing last week. Spent part of two days at the memorial museum. It had a strong impact, and seeing it in two shorter sessions instead of one long one worked out best for me emotionally. Admission is free and it's very close to a metro stations, so the logistics of splitting it up were not difficult.

I saw several Japanese tourists walking through thoughtfully and respectfully. Was pleased to not overhear any rude personal remarks directed at them.

Remember the place is closed on Mondays in case you are planning to go.

[gato]

A book by Stanford University researchers comparing history books in Japan, China, and South Korea:

http://www.amazon.co...ader_041560303X

History Textbooks and the Wars in Asia: Divided Memories

I've attached a screenshot from Amazon preview of a chapter comparing the section on Nanking.

http://educationinja...erve-bad-press/

SPECIAL ON HISTORY TEXTBOOKS / 5 nations, 5 different historical perspectives of war

The description of what occurred in Nanjing differs from nation to nation. The following are excerpts from the history books of five nations:

===

Japan

In August, hostilities broke out in Shanghai [second Shanghai Incident], and the flames of war (senka) spread south. In September, the Nationalist and Communist parties again formed a coalition (Second United Front), and established a national anti-Japanese united front (konichi minzoku touitsu sensen). Japan continuously committed a large army [to the area], and occupied the Nationalist government capital in Nanjing by the end of the year.

Because the Nationalist government retreated from Nanjing to Hankou and then further inland to Chongqing and persistently continued its resistance, the Sino-Japanese war became a quagmire-like drawn-out war (doronuma no yona chokisen).

Footnote: In addition to repeated looting and violence (ryakudatsu, boko) within and outside Nanjing at the time of its fall, the Imperial Japanese Army murdered (satsugai) a large number of (tasu) Chinese noncombatants (including women and children) and prisoners (Nanjing Incident). The situation in Nanjing was reported to the Army Central Command through the Foreign Ministry in the early stages [of the incident].

“Japanese History B” (Yamakawa Shuppansha, 2002), page 330.

[gato]

http://www.usip.org/...le/kasahara.pdf

Reconciling Narratives of the Nanjing Massacre in Japanese and Chinese Textbooks

Tsuru Bunka University

Tokushi Kasahara

II. Description of the Nanjing Massacre in Japanese and Chinese Textbooks

(1) Japan

In Japan, there are eight history textbooks that are used today in junior high schools. All

textbooks use the words “Nanjing Incident,” “Nanjing Massacre,” or “Nanjing Massacre

Incident” to describe the atrocities. The textbook published by the Tôkyô Shoseki is the most

widely adopted in Japan and currently holds a market share of 51.2%. In it, the passage about

the Nanjing Massacre reads as follows. “The Japanese military occupied the capital of Nanjing in

the same year [1937]. In its process, [the military] killed a massive number of Chinese, including

women and children.” In contrast, the publisher Nihon Shoseki, specified the estimate of the

casualties in Nanjing, stating, “In late December [1937], the Japanese military captured the

capital Nanjing. [The military] killed as many as 200,000 prisoners of war and civilians, and the

atrocities and looting were not brought to an end; therefore, [Japan’s capture of Nanjing]

received fierce international condemnation.” Although Nihon Shoseki resisted pressure from the

Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science, and Technology (MEXT) to omit a specific

figure for the death estimate, Nihon Shoseki was the only publisher among the eight that gave a

specific number to quantify the atrocities in Nanjing. As conservative critics began to rally

against the textbook, the market share of this book fell to a mere 3.1%.

Unlike these two textbooks, Fusôsha’s textbook, written by the pro-Imperial revisionist

organization called the Japanese Society for History Textbook Reform, avoided strong terms

such as “atrocity” and stressed that the debate over Nanjing is on-going and that the historical

facts are unclear. They write, “the Japanese military believed that Chiang Kai-shek would

surrender if Nanjing were captured, and they conquered Nanjing in December.” In the footnote,

the publisher added, “at this time, the Japanese military killed and wounded many Chinese

soldiers and civilians (the Nanjing Incident). Moreover, various views and data exist regarding

the historical facts, including the casualty estimate, and the debate continues to this day.”

Because citizens’ groups organized a successful campaign to prevent the textbook from being

adopted by boards of education across Japan, its market share has ended up only around 0.4%.

[yialanliu]

Gato, you need to stop being baised. You have a history of using biased information such as comparing per capita income with income per worker, looking at budget of Fudan and using a singular number of federalk\ government funding and excluding municipal funding which accounts for 50% of their budget, posting information that is not net additions of new housing but rather just counting newly built sqm for housing.

The textbook incident happened in 2005. It's a good thing that things are different now. In 2002, things were also different. There was no protest from 2002-2005 or anyting, the protest happened in relation to an EVENT in Japan. Posting information from 2002 about a textbook incidident in 2005 is the most biased things ever. Let's post about the German Holocaust from an article in 1920.

The disgusting thing is that the books were never banned. Good for the citizens to protest, but the Minestry of Education or its equivalent should have banned those books as educational material for students. If Germany tried to publish a holocaust version and call it Auchwitz Incident, I'd be extremely displeased.

Next, once again, tell me how in the name of colonization you can commit acts of genocide and say they are different?

The Nazi in the name of creating the healthiest and best race did many things that we do not condone. They killed many people including Jews, Jehovah's Witnesses, mentally disabled and mant other groups without discrimiation.

The Japanese in your opinion used colonization and did many things that are also unacceptable. What they did was kill Chinese people within Nanjing without discrimination. That is exactly the same as Germany albeit with less victims but still the same concept of killing a blanket group of people.