This is a mobile optimized page that loads fast, if you want to load the real page, click this text.

Japan to teach patriotism to children

Toru Ranryu said:
Do you think the English get taught about the bad things their country has done?
Click to expand...

The English have been told about their wrong-doings, real and alleged, incessantly for at least the last 30 years. So much so that, until recently, it's been almost a requirement to apologise when explaining that you're English. This has changed recently, not due to some kind of distasteful nationalism, but a mood of 'hey, enough already!'

And when you say 'English' do you mean 'British' ? From a world political standpoint, 'English' interaction with the world is in fact 'British'. Within Britain though, the English are usually blamed for all Britain's past wrong-doings (again, real and alleged) even though the Scots and the Welsh were vital members, and often leaders, of the 'team.'

So yes, the British (esp the English) are taught about all of past British mistakes, and rightly so, in stark contrast to many Japanese people's knowledge of their own history. Conversely, the British are almost never taught any of the good things. Praising aspects of Britain's past is almost a taboo.

To return to the main point of the thread: one of the things I like about Britain (and esp England) is that flag-flying and the singing of national anthems is almost completely restricted to international sporting events. You'll never see a British flag in a corner of classroom (this is contrast to eg Japan, the USA and France.) The idea of singing the national anthem at a British school is utterly ludicrous.
 
regarding the national athem matter:

When I had first settled down here in '83, they didn't have any national anthem singing in the schools. They did havd the flag out at the graduation and opening ceremonies, but they also had the school flag right there with it.

Then, that changed, and there have been a least two rashes (as far as I know) of ousting teachers from the public school system who had refused to sing or direct the students to sing the national anthem.

I am not against those who wish to sing it, no; I am against those who wish to force those who care not to, or would rather not, sing it, to sing it. I am entrenched in that freedom of choice.

I am for 'the love of ones country' to the same extent and for the same reasons that I am for 'the love of ones own propery'. This does not mean, in my book, to the degree that a absence of love of for another's property follows, because, from ones own property, to ones neighborhood, to ones town/city, to ones prefecture/state/region, to ones country, to, finally, ones planet. If we develop the ability to allow the 'love of ones own country' to extend to the 'love of the international community' in the same manner that the love of ones own property--in neighborhood aggregate--extends to the 'love of neighborhood', we are more likely to be better off in the long run; ALL parties. In this case, I would be for that element being taught in public schools.

Alas, we have a certain human nature to deal with, so, who knows. I am going to keep my eye on this as some information is supposed to come out later this month or next.
 
School would have been just a bit more unbearable if I had to suffer national anthems and flag waving and all that.

Patriotic zeal should be saved for adults to decide when and where and how its appropriate, not forced on Kids by the educational establishment.
 

I apologise. I tried to read this a few times but kept getting lost in a sea of prepositions and 'ones'. I'd like to understand the meaning a bit better - sorry Mars Man - can I request a bit of elaboration for us simple folk?

Japan_Observer said:
Winds of change are blowing through Japanese society. It may take time before their impact on the landscape is realized, but they are blowing, and they will leave Japan changed.
Click to expand...

Winds of something else are blowing from what I see and it would appear to be a lot of naive propogandic hot air.
 
Patriotism was never a good thing. Whereever it is taught.
 
just today i came across a b&w pic of a us flag with these among other
words printed across it.

"the pledge of allegiance is obedience training"


the past 15 or so years i've been learning or studying about this type of thing, **(not to say the means i know what i am talking about, mind you)** but that statement is clearer than i've ever seen it. maybe it's been
the last 6 years that really put it in perspective?


Perhaps worse?
in the States a couple years ago there has been a big hubub about the words "under god" in the pledge of allegiance.
And saying the pledge in schools. Sure kids don't have to say it, but non-conformity isn't always that easy when you are a kid.
I too agree with Nurizeko
 
Last edited:
(whatever you believe in) be saved for adults to decide when and where and how its appropriate, not forced on Kids by the educational establishment.

Just fill out the bracket.
 
School in and of itself has all manner of institutionalized activities that even moreso than nebulous ideas of 'patriotism' encourage orthodoxy and socialization in a group environment.

You pledge to a flag, or you pledge to a fraternity, what matters most in either is the institution of orthodoxy.
 
People are confusing patriotism with nationalism.

Patriotism is love for one's country, pure and simple. Nationalism is much more politically charged. However, people constantly confuse the two concepts, as can be seen here all over this thread.

Teaching patriotism is never bad. Everyone should be patriotic. If you aren't you do not deserve to be a citizen. If you do not love your country, you have no right to influence it politically or socially--you have effectively renounced your stake in it.

Nevertheless, that does not equate with being nationalistic. And therein lies the problem. In many countries, the liberal trend is to fight patriotism for fear of sliding into nationalism. Indeed, liberalism itself can develop into its own form of nationalism. In nationalist ideologies, the individual's well-being is overridden by the state's. However, with patriotism, the individual is willing to sacrifice his well-being for his country (as opposed to his state).

There are nuances. Once you pull the two concepts apart, you realize that patriotism is healthy for a people. I have no objection to Japanese teaching patriotism. They should. Their children should respect their history and love their country. Patriotism isn't an ideology like nationalism. It is a feeling. And it knows no political party. And it can be a force for excellence. No matter what your country has done, right or wrong, you can always be patriotic. Only nationalism requires blinders to history.

Between you and me, I'd prefer to have a patriot as my leader, rather than a nationalist, or someone who believes in political correctness.
 
A new year special interview from left spinning media to young headspin master


It is hard to find any logic in the quesiton, #4, #5 and others.

Aichi, the headspin guy in youtube
 
hideway said:
Patriotism was never a good thing. Whereever it is taught.
Click to expand...


I disagree and would like to counter with this quote from GEL which I think says it very well;


There is nothing wrong in my opinion with having a love for one's country, I also think that Japanese people really haven't been educated to understand the difference between nationalism and patriotism.

I am a patriot but not a nationalist, I love my country but am not so blind as to not see it's failings amongst it great points. If the two can be separated there is nothing wrong with teaching patriotism.
 
Teaching patriotism is always a difficult task.
Because sometimes it is too sporadically and sometimes it is turning into nationalism.
Finding a well-balanced way to teach patriotism to young people isn't that easy. Some might not be interested in politics and national pride at all, some consider their own country as the only right one and superior to others.
I would say, the result should be, that you love your country and do your best (contribute) for your country, but stay self-critical. That is a healthy way of patriotism.
 
Last edited:

Very well said! I mean, very detailed and correct definition of Patriotism and Nationalism!
 
patriotism vs nationalism,
yeah. it depends a lot on what one's definition of patriotism is.
"my country right or wrong" goes almost beyond even nationalism.
jingoism. which includes the ugly scurge of racism: " 'my people' are supremacist to others". that demented thinking can easily grow out of nationalism.

maybe it depends on the teacher,
how patriotism would be taught.
if the teacher is racist, such delusions are more likely to be passed
down to students.

If one loves their country or land & people(friends & family?), however you define country, shouldn't that, as any feeling of love, come naturally from within and not something that can be taught? Is it possible to teach love?

Is patriotism memorizing a national anthem or some oath to a piece
of cloth, especially if one doesn't know the meaning of such words? Liking the official color scheme of the nation's flag or coat of arms?
 
This topic has really got me tied in a knot mentally.

--On the one hand there is the danger of nationalism breeding racism.

--And on the other hand not being pushed around by larger more powerful countries either militarily or economically nationalism could be a good thing.

During the cold war nationalism was aroused to attempt to bring about de-colonization.
Often times what was basically anti-colonialism was labeled communism by the US because nationalists did not believe that merely switching far-off imperial rule with local political managers was all there was to ending colonialism. They also believed that the European power should stop taking their resources and the people of that country should be the primary beneficiaries of them. oooh, so radical.... scary. Maybe from the point of view of the Dutch East Indies Company or the Hudson Bay Company or whatever were the names of the relavent companies that did the wealth extraction in the name of the crown, as corporations were first invented for.

Many countries merely wanted to be members of the non-aligned movement and didn't buy into the 3rd grade level of thinking "you're either with us, or you are with the terro--, er communists".



GodEmperorLeto
i think has it right
"Patriotism is love for one's country, pure and simple."
but i do not know how you could teach that.
And i do not believe you could be punished for not having such love.
What would be the standards, how would one enforce them,
and wouldn't you need some sort of thought police to enforce it?
 
Touching and informing text. Still, I would perfer to live in a world where one could grow free without being brainwashed by either the government or religious organizations.
 
hideway said:
Touching and informing text. Still, I would perfer to live in a world where one could grow free without being brainwashed by either the government or religious organizations.
Click to expand...

Ahh but then those in "power" wouldn't be in power any more now would they?

To live or strive for utopia, not a bad idea, but unfortunately not something that I think I will see in my life time, however much I might wish it to be as well.

Heck look at what is happening in Venezuela right now. I wouldn't exactly call what the President there is doing as being an act of a patriot, but that of a nationalist. Yet many there understand and accept what is happening purely because their lives have been made better, right now. If it works for the long run, and doesn't tumble down the road to being a dictatorship will future textbooks then call the man a patriot or a nationalist? I think it also depends on who one is asking the question to as well.

Where would the world be without religion too. I think many people feel the need to want to belong to something, or a part of something in their lives. Religion gives them sense of "belonging" no matter how much "brain-washing" that religion may have or use. The idea of religion does not lend itself to the ideals of freedom of thought.

I also know some very well educated people that are extremely predjudiced, racist and nationalist as well, so it isn't just education that helps to overcome recognizing the differences between nationalism and patriotism. In my opinion it is the "power" that people feel that they have, even if they "know" in their hearts that what they are doing is immoral or unethical that promotes the ideals of "nationalism".

Nationalism breeds greed, greed of something, whether it be of property, money or an adherance to a set of rules and laws that is exclusionary of others. Something that sets, to the believer, them apart or seemingly above others and to me there is more than enough of that in the world right now.

Yet using the definition of nationalism and patriotism that GEL wrote I like to believe myself to be an agnostic, non-practicing patriot.
 
There is nothing wrong in my opinion with having a love for one's country, I also think that Japanese people really haven't been educated to understand the difference between nationalism and patriotism.
Click to expand...

The terms are English after all, but many Japanese know blind or innocent liberal heads kill people.
 
The thing is you have no choice where you are born, it is decided for you, along with your citizenship.

Patriotism has a time and place, and for the most part, there is no place for it.

I dont need to have a raging hard-on for Scotland to appriciate it, to appriciate the fair laws, to appriciate the economic comfortability, the good climate, I definately dont need patriotism to wish the best for my family and friends and the well-being of my community.


You dont lose your "stake" in the country because you never invested it in the first place, you were born, you grew up, and had been labelled a citizen of that country long before you were able to contemplate citizenship.


I would fight for my country if the need arose, but that was my choice in my own time of my own will.


As I said, patriotism is for adults to decide.

Let the kids learn, and leave it to themselves to descover what they like and dislike about their homeland.

Patriotism has more meanings then flag waving, someone who speak up against unjust laws or government activities can be a patriot, those who protest a percieved wrong-doing can be a patriot.
Those who work towards what they think is for the best of the country can be a patriot, for all Tony Blairs idiocy, I wouldnt say he doesnt care for Britain in some way.

Patriotism means many things, and ussually, what it really means is being a good person and doing what is right, even when the establishment thinks its wrong.

Waving flags about and forcing kids to sing songs about the country isnt patriotism, its merely an empty ritual of shallow symbolism.

I might march under one, but I wouldnt die for a flag.
 
nurizeko said:
The thing is you have no choice where you are born, it is decided for you, along with your citizenship.
Click to expand...
People may knock the U.S., but here, your citizenship is a choice, not a birthright. My ancestors are from Italy, Germany, and Lithuania. I've dated girls who's ancestors came here three hundred years ago, a hundred years ago, fifty, and twenty. All of them were Americans.


If that is how you feel, then you are definitely confusing patriotism with nationalism.


nurizeko said:
I would fight for my country if the need arose, but that was my choice in my own time of my own will.
Click to expand...
And you are implying that the willingness to do so is not patriotism?


nurizeko said:
As I said, patriotism is for adults to decide.
Click to expand...
Children should be taught values, and patriotism is a value. It should be instilled in them, because it is good teaching. If people were patriotic, they'd desire what was best for their society and their country--what is good. Patriotism isn't blind. It is an appreciation for those who have gone before and sacrificed for you to have things you might otherwise not have had. Liking and disliking aspects of your homeland is separate from patriotism.

I might march under one, but I wouldnt die for a flag.
Click to expand...
I would, because whether you realize it or not, your flag is your country.

Except for a few semantic points, though, you and I agree a lot about what patriotism is. Nevertheless, I do believe it should be taught, and isn't necessarily just empty ritual. It is part of your culture. A prominent Native American historian once said that a people never dies so long as they still sing their songs, learn their stories and histories, and feels connection with one-another. Patriotism is just that--shared cultural legacies, and a love for those legacies. As an American, I am proud of many historical figures from my past, I know many of our songs by heart, and even enjoy mythical events, such as Washington chopping down the cherry tree (which, yes, never happened).

The lack of patriotism shared between me and my current generation is tangible. You can see it. People are more worried about Gucci and Lost than they are whether-or-not we are doing the right thing in Iraq. And the only reason people in the US want us out isn't because they truly believe it is wrong, it is because they are afraid of getting drafted, or afraid that they'll have to keep paying $50 to fill their SUV.

In centuries past, Americans were willing to sacrifice things in order to achieve something. Now, we aren't. Because patriotism is the antithesis to selfish consumerism. To be a patriot, you have to be selfless.

Nationalism and selfish consumerism, on the other hand, go together. People are more apt to vote for someone who lies about being patriotic than someone who truly is. And nationalist regimes FORCE you to sacrifice. They make it too inconvenient to fight for your freedoms and rights. People in my country would gladly sign away their freedoms if it would guarantee they could still watch American Idol and have sex with their gardener. Why? Because we no longer have any sort of patriotism. There is either apathy, or nationalism.
 
i would not kill for some made up way to divide us that they call a country,
and i sure as hell ain't going to die for one either.

which is the purpose of the ideology of patriotism.

kill to protect power (those that have the ability via force or persuasion, or survival - money for food, to get you to do stuff for them, including kill)

people matter, not these imaginary lines in the sand.
(gosh i wish i knew how to convey that without sounding like i'm drawing a line in the sand)
 
Now I've no complete idea on what are you talking about now. What does Venezuela have to do with avoiding brainwash of children? And why protecting them from being brainwashed is an utopia at all?

Also I don't belive you ever heard me stating that religion should disapear. All I said is: let people, when they have suficiente maturity, choose by themselfs. Schools should be an institution for teaching and educating our children, and never to make them belive whatever the government nor what a religion wants. If one wants to be patriotic, christian, jew, muslin or whatever, let him be, but by his own choice.

GodEmperorLeto said:
I would, because whether you realize it or not, your flag is your country.
Click to expand...
Actually a flag it's just what it is, a flag.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

COVID-19 Coronavirus: situation in Japan
46 47 48
Replies
1K
Views
176K
salyavin
C
Japan's Conspiracy (1)
9 10 11
Replies
257
Views
98K
Weegoabrame
W
  • Poll Poll
Is it time for US Force to leave Japan?
17 18 19
Replies
459
Views
94K
Kreator san
K
What are they teaching the children?
2
Replies
39
Views
7K
korean_turtle87
K
G
  • Poll Poll
Is Japan really a democracy?
6 7 8
Replies
198
Views
76K
Levi Ackerman
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more…