It's NOT a crime to visit Yasukuni Shrine !

[The7thSamurai]

Yes I'm sure you were the first one to have discovered this issue. Ever tried references other than Wikipedia?

Umm, I don't think he meant he actually discovered the issue. You can raise an issue that has already been discovered. As for Wikipedia, the good thing about that website is that it has multiple reference to back up its information. It's probably one of the best reference points on the web.

 

[Maciamo]

Yes I'm sure you were the first one to have discovered this issue. Ever tried references other than Wikipedia?

I don't want to spend 10min searching for a good article just to give a few random examples., and Wikipedia is the most convenient and reliable source I know. It's in my bookmarks - just type the name I want, and here we go. I used encyclopedia.com before, though.

 

[Pierrot le Fou]

I will have to second the wikipedia comment. It's an absolutely wonderful resource because it uses so many different sources for its information. I would never use it for a college paper or something of the sort, but as far as getting an idea about an issue, it's hard to top. If you read the discussion pages over contentious issues (I suggest, for instance, you check out the Nanking Massacre's discussion page), you will see that things of questionable validity are really put through the ringer. It's a good resource with flaws, as all resources have. The plus is that it's very comprehensive.

 

[The7thSamurai]

Why Koizumi should continue to visit the Yasukuni Shrine

Discussion on the other threads regarding the Yasukuni Shrine in Tokyo has lead me to think more about it. I actually think that Kouzumi should continue to visit the shrine simply BECAUSE of the contraversy it causes. If Kouzumi continues to visit it, then China and Korea will keep protesting, and there will be more news reports on Japanese TV about it, which will get people talking, and which will indirectly educate the Japanese public about the atrocities committed by Japan in its past. Once the Japanese public understands better what actually happened then there is no way the constitution will be revised because the people simply would not allow it.

If Kouzumi et al want to revise the consitition, then wouldn't it be wiser to keep such negative aspects of Japan's past as far out of the public mind as possible, and therefore not do anything that might spark public debate (such as visiting the shrine)?

 

[lexico]

Bucko, you are offering a very interesting conspiration theory- while I have not the evidence to either support or refute your thesis, it does appear to make some sense, that is assuming a higher level of thinking than what is immediately possible to observe on the surface.

If the intention of Koizumi's Yasukuni visits were indeed to foster continuing debate on the revisionist-whitewashing of Japan's militarist past to the effect of preventing deeper corruption, that is not such a hugely impossible task if done right. PM Koizumi becoming the foul guy for the future of Japan would be considered honorable, although the method would be considered highly unconventional.

The only problem is; why not take the shorter, less painful path, and take the thorny path of controversy ? Would it not benefit Japan many more times to take up the historical responsibility in a straightforward manner ? Although controversy is not all counterproductive, there are huge losses on all sides of the debate, not to mention the huge political loss that he/the LDP will have to suffer as a result of the controversy should his plans go well as intended. Because he will not have left a track record of willful acceptance of war-time responsibilities and post-war responsibilities, he will lose the voters' trust who will have accepted the facts. Another problem that would arise would be the victims/survivors who did not get the recognition they deserved, legally, and socially. When they die out, any chance of making peace and reparation that is satisfactory is all lost. That is the greatest loss that no money can ever remedy.

However, I am not totally against your theory because an extreme situation can make a person take extreme measures accordingly. We just have to prove it with more hard work. Let's see how it goes, evidence, reasoning, past history since 1978 and all.

 

[Tokyo-K1]

All in all I believe the visit by Koizumi is a bad move, both morally and diplomatically.
What happened in the past should remain in the past and we should all move forward together. Angering Japan's neighbours would both hurt relations and financial ties, China is Japan's largest trading partner and annoying China over something rooted in the WWII conflict is not in Japan's best interests or the stability of Asia for that matter.

Maybe what is need here is not the notion that one countries "debt" can be fully repaid in full, that is not to say that Japan should keep its head down forever but rather it should accept its wrongs in the past, to remember them constantly and avoid a tragic repeat of history. That goes for any other country, because lets face it, there is not one country in the world that have not commited "wrongs" in the past.
If we all carry this element of humility then the world would have less conflicts.

What Koizumi is trying to do I think is that he wants Japan to "start a new blank slate" that is to wipe Japan clean of it's "debt" and responsibilities for crimes commited in its past. Already there are talks within the government ranks of Japan of becoming a "normal country" again and rebuild it's military force to shift away from the current stance of strict pacifism.
I believe this concept is highly materialistic and in the wrong direction. A nation's armed forces should be used as a self defence force, and plus you cannot just wipe the grief of millions on millions off massacred lives of the board like they're figures from the previous financial year. We must all bear/remember burdens and lessons from the past in order to progress. Isn't there a Japanese saying "Learn from the past"

 

[McTojo]

All in all I believe the visit by Koizumi is a bad move, both morally and diplomatically.
What happened in the past should remain in the past and we should all move forward together. Angering Japan's neighbours would both hurt relations and financial ties, China is Japan's largest trading partner and annoying China over something rooted in the WWII conflict is not in Japan's best interests or the stability of Asia for that matter.

Maybe what is need here is not the notion that one countries "debt" can be fully repaid in full, that is not to say that Japan should keep its head down forever but rather it should accept its wrongs in the past, to remember them constantly and avoid a tragic repeat of history. That goes for any other country, because lets face it, there is not one country in the world that have not commited "wrongs" in the past.
If we all carry this element of humility then the world would have less conflicts.

What Koizumi is trying to do I think is that he wants Japan to "start a new blank slate" that is to wipe Japan clean of it's "debt" and responsibilities for crimes commited in its past. Already there are talks within the government ranks of Japan of becoming a "normal country" again and rebuild it's military force to shift away from the current stance of strict pacifism.
I believe this concept is highly materialistic and in the wrong direction. A nation's armed forces should be used as a self defence force, and plus you cannot just wipe the grief of millions on millions off massacred lives of the board like they're figures from the previous financial year. We must all bear/remember burdens and lessons from the past in order to progress. Isn't there a Japanese saying "Learn from the past"

Yes, but in no way should that mean Japan should remain a pacifist nation.
Neither does it mean that China should continue to nurse grudges either . Japan has learned from the past and that's why she has progressed over the years as a model asian nation.

It's fine to make suggestion about what a country should be like or how she should remain but I believe that it's the Japanese who want to determine their destiny now.

 

[McTojo]

Discussion on the other threads regarding the Yasukuni Shrine in Tokyo has lead me to think more about it. I actually think that Kouzumi should continue to visit the shrine simply BECAUSE of the contraversy it causes. If Kouzumi continues to visit it, then China and Korea will keep protesting, and there will be more news reports on Japanese TV about it, which will get people talking, and which will indirectly educate the Japanese public about the atrocities committed by Japan in its past. Once the Japanese public understands better what actually happened then there is no way the constitution will be revised because the people simply would not allow it.)?

Have you ever been to Yasukuni ? You should go...actually, the assertion you made about the constitution not being revised once the Japanese public understands better what actually happened is a subjective statement. There are millions of Japanese who understand the historical stigma that's tied to Yasukuni and yet they still go. Two million of those same people support the shrine monetarily and respect the fact that Koizumi visits the shrine and that's a fact and it cannot be refuted by wikipedia or any other sources.

If Kouzumi et al want to revise the consitition, then wouldn't it be wiser to keep such negative aspects of Japan's past as far out of the public mind as possible, and therefore not do anything that might spark public debate (such as visiting the shrine)?

If Koizumi want so revise the constitution then he will regardless of public opinion. Koizumi is a man of strong resolve who has proven that he can get the job done. If you haven't already noticed Mr. Koizumi always gets his way.
He got his way when he dispatched SDF troops to Iraq which was clearly in violation of the constitution; he got his way when passing his controversial postal reform bill and he will get his way again on a number of other issues.

 

[Maciamo]

There are millions of Japanese who understand the historical stigma that's tied to Yasukuni and yet they still go. Two million of those same people support the shrine monetarily and respect the fact that Koizumi visits the shrine and that's a fact and it cannot be refuted by wikipedia or any other sources.

I have been many times to Yasukuni-jinja. But as a tourist (my Japanese happened to be a few hundreds meters from there). I didn't pay homage or made monetary donation to anybody. The problem is not to go there. It is indeed not a crime to visit the shrine. The 2 issues are :

1) it's unconstitutional for politicians to visit it (especially in group as they usually do, as it makes it look like an official visit) and especially make donations using their government account (=tax money), as PM Koizumi did.

2) Even if the constitution allowed the visits (were it to be changed), politicians paying homage to war criminals will naturally governments and citizens of the victi countries. This is not desirable for Japan, for its neighbours, and for peace and good relations in East Asia.

So stop bringing in irrelevant arguments such as the number of annual visitors (how many tourists like me coming to see the cherry blossom of Chidorigafuchi just opposite ?) or that some ordinary people support the Prime Ministers's visits. 2 million visitors is actually very few for a population of 128 million. The 35 million residents of the Greater Tokyo would have no excuse about the distance.

Koizumi is a man of strong resolve who has proven that he can get the job done.

What's the relevance ? Job done for what ? The Japanese economy has not really go better in his 4-year term. In fact, his term (like Bush's term) will be mostly remembered abroad for deteriorating foreign relations by his irresponsible behaviour. No wonder he is such a good friend of Bush Jr. !

He got his way when he dispatched SDF troops to Iraq which was clearly in violation of the constitution

This was clearly against the will of the majority of the population (as the Japanese media claimed). Koizumi, like Bush, often gets his way because he has the top job. It doesn't mean he is right. Both the yen and the US dollar are at their lowest against the euro in the last 5 years. The yen has lost about 50% of its value against the euro since I arrived in Japan. Koizumi certainly gets the job done.

 

[lexico]

Yes, but in no way should that mean Japan should remain a pacifist nation.

By denying the Japanese Constitution, Article no. 9, are you saying Japan should return to militarism ?

Under Article 9 of the constitution "the Japanese people renounce war as a sovereign right of the nation". To this end the article provides that "land, sea, and air forces, as well as other war potential, will never be maintained". However the courts have ruled that Japan may raise an army, navy and air force provided it is used for the purposes of self-defence

Japan already has the SDF for defense on/in ground, air, and sea to be used only if Japan is provoked in an attack arising from the outside. The SDF of Japan with 5 Aegis Carriers is already an exorbitant over-kill for defending a small piece of land no more than 374,744 square kilometres. Japan can never provoke again- that was the deal of The Sanfrancisco Peace Treaty 1952. Honor it to the spirit, to the letter !

Neither does it mean that China should continue to nurse grudges either.

Nurse grudges ? Legal grievance is hardly grudge; your language is in contempt not only of the Japanese Constitution in effect but also of the Chinese victims of Imperial Japanese aggression and all who suffered due to Imperial Japan; the number exceeds 100 million in Asia and abroad.

Japan has learned from the past...

Prove it.

and that's why she has progressed over the years as a model asian nation.

Model Asian nation in what ? When and in what was this "model behaviour" demonstrated exactly ?

It's fine to make suggestion about what a country should be like or how she should remain but I believe that it's the Japanese who want to determine their destiny now.

You are very right about that; should the Japanese voters and legislator make the ill-willed move, I believe there is sufficient cause to believe that the fate of Japan will be sealed due to it. Japan's voters and legistlators shall proceed with extreme caution.

 

[lastmagi]

Well... Apologies everyone for past and possible future delays in my responses. I'm trying not to let these debates get in the way of my academics.

Yes, but in no way should that mean Japan should remain a pacifist nation.

Does backing away from further disrespect of other nations necessitate a kind of pacifism that you seem to deem as being weak and "giving in"? I doubt such actions could be so polarized.

Neither does it mean that China should continue to nurse grudges either . Japan has learned from the past and that's why she has progressed over the years as a model asian nation.

Has Japan really learned from its past? Is it a model Asian nation, in the context we've been describing (not that I'm saying such a thing as a "model Asian nation" necessarily exists, mind you; in fact, saying that is downright patronizing)? Sources? Evidence?

It's fine to make suggestion about what a country should be like or how she should remain but I believe that it's the Japanese who want to determine their destiny now.

And should they do it blindly, with little respect for other nations? Should they do it purely with their own short-term self-interests in mind?

There are millions of Japanese who understand the historical stigma that's tied to Yasukuni and yet they still go. Two million of those same people support the shrine monetarily and respect the fact that Koizumi visits the shrine and that's a fact and it cannot be refuted by wikipedia or any other sources.

So? Does the fact that these people visit it make your argument any stronger?

Remember that Japan, by continuing to be insensitive to its neighbors is not simply flexing its nationalistic muscles, which you seem to persist in cheering on. It is also bit by bit furthering its own denial of morality and human decency. It's dehumanizing itself by its rejection of understanding of some basic principles of maturity and responsibility. There's much more to being a mature, responsibile nation than empowering its people against the harsh, dictatorial oppression of other nations (I'm being ironic here). That's the stereotypical "tough guy" road, and we all know how smart that strategy is.