[Kaiserschmarrn]

That and a well deserved feeling of guilt of course.

You are very much mistaken if you believe the Japanese are motivated guilt. Not even European countries that were allies of Germany in WWII feel guilt. Germany is pretty much the only country on earth (and maybe even throughout history) that has embraced guilt, to the extent that it could be said to be part of the German identity, for atrocities committed in the past. It's an anomaly that benefits no-one, with the exception perhaps of making people like you feel a little better.

Oh, and still reeling from a couple of atom bombs I suppose.

Also nonsense.

[marjy]

You are very much mistaken if you believe the Japanese are motivated guilt.

That was a natural assumption on my part

If you know otherwise then of course I bow to your superior knowledge.

Germany is pretty much the only country on earth (and maybe even throughout history) that has embraced guilt, to the extent that it could be said to be part of the German identity, for atrocities committed in the past.

It would appear so.

It's an anomaly that benefits no-one, with the exception perhaps of making people like you feel a little better.

I have no feelings on the matter at all.

One can't claim the use of the atom bomb had no effect on postwar relations between Japan and the US.

1945 Atom bombs deployed > Japanese unconditional surrender > US occupation of Japan > 1951 Security Treaty > 1952 & 1960 Treaty of Mutual Cooperation and Security > 1971 Okinawa Reversion Agreement.

[Kaiserschmarrn]

That was a natural assumption on my part

If you know otherwise then of course I bow to your superior knowledge.

I find it odd that you'd think otherwise, to be honest. Do you know of any documented collective guilt of subsequent generations after other conflicts? I would go even further and say that guilt is extremely unusual even for the generation that participates in a conflict.

I have no feelings on the matter at all.

Okay. When you say the guilt is "well-deserved", one could get the impression that you'd derive some satisfaction from it.

Apart from that, I would be interested to know why you believe the current generation of Japanese should feel guilty. Surely, guilt is not inherited.

[marjy]

I find it odd that you'd think otherwise, to be honest. Do you know of any documented collective guilt of subsequent generations after other conflicts? I would go even further and say that guilt is extremely unusual even for the generation that participates in a conflict.

I suppose the first documented example of collective and inherited guilt would be found in the Bible and the later Christian doctrine of original sin.

Psalm 51:5 “Behold, I was brought forth in iniquity, and in sin did my mother conceive me.”

The second century St. Irenaeus believed all human beings participated in Adam's sin and shared in his guilt.

Martin Luther also proposed that all humanity inherited Adam's guilt and were in a state of sin from the moment of conception.

[Note: I won't respond to any theological comments. After 2,000 years of debate we're not going to resolve the matter here ]

Collective guilt (and punishment) was meted out by the Nazis against the Jews of course and well documented by written, photographic and cinematographic means - although not for widespread publication.

With regard to your point about collective guilt after a conflict, the same written, photographic and cinematographic techniques were used by the Allies explicitly for the purpose of mass consumption with the testimony from victims, witnesses and participants being shown to a worldwide audience.

Documentary films of the concentration camps often carried the message “Why we fought” etc. and this post war message could be interpreted as the Allies (or at least their own citizens) not being entirely sure what they'd been fighting for in the first place.

It would be interesting to know exactly who came up with the concept of collective guilt for the German people as a policy decision. I'm fairly sure the words collective guilt didn't appear in the Potsdam Agreement for example. I know Jung coined the word Kollektivschuld in 1945 but have a feeling it may have been some time after the Allied policy decision had been made.

It was definitely a political decision though and not a call for revenge by 'the people'. Many people in Britain sent regular food packages to Germany after the war for several years, despite rationing here being more severe than it was in war-time.

When you say the guilt is "well-deserved", one could get the impression that you'd derive some satisfaction from it.

Not at all. It's back to semantics I suppose. Guilt can mean either culpability or remorse.

“I was guilty of theft” has a greatly different meaning to “I feel guilty about missing your birthday party” . And at the emotional or cognitive level guilt can also be either destructive or constructive; the former evidencing itself in self-loathing and the latter in self-forgiveness.

Apart from that, I would be interested to know why you believe the current generation of Japanese should feel guilty.

One hopes the Japanese are no different from ourselves in that regard.

Culpable for acts of war committed on all sides and remorse at their impact on humanity.

Surely, guilt is not inherited.

I would be rather worried if it wasn't.

It could mean we no longer feel responsible for our past and thereby abdicate responsibility for addressing current injustice we had a part in creating.

[Kaiserschmarrn]

It's rather odd that you would start a theological argument, only to state immediately afterwards that you don't want to talk about it.

It doesn't matter whether you interpret guilt as culpability or remorse, we cannot and shouldn't expect either from people who had absolutely nothing to do with the actions of past generations. Otherwise we end up with everybody needing to feel "well deserved guilt", collectively and individually, and singling out the Japanese doesn't make any sense.

Collective guilt (and punishment) was meted out by the Nazis against the Jews of course and well documented by written, photographic and cinematographic means - although not for widespread publication.

You are right, of course, and it's an awful thing to do. The only question is why you think it's fine when applied to the Japanese.

[Baff]

Because the people who did it and the people it was done to are still alive.
There is bad blood. Our parents will try and kill each other if the wrong words are spoken.

I've known old people to start screaming their heads of hysterically when confronted by a Japanese schoolgirl.


Otherwise I should agree. There is no need to feel guilt for actions that are not your own.

But this is to miss the point. These people must know that we are ready to kill them all.
It keeps them pacifist. Turns evil monsters into cute angels.

[Rei Murasame]

I've known old people to start screaming their heads of hysterically when confronted by a Japanese schoolgirl.

I tend to laugh at such people. Tormenting old white people is actually more fun than you think it is, removing the feelings of safety from them is almost like a game.

I am glad that Europe and America's 'greatest generation' have an inbuilt fear not of just Japanese, but of all Asians. We are the ones that fight back, and if fucked with, we will omnicidally make the wars as expensive as possible for you, by killing you, ourselves, and our own allies if we have to, because unlike the cakewalk Africans we are actually legitimate lunatics.

Even when we lose, we extract our pound of flesh before we go down, on principle.

[Doomhammer]

Cold War geopolitics and beyond. Japan and US both fear(ed) Russia and now China. Simple as that.

There is also an interesting study on alliances by Jeremy Pressman. The basic idea is that great powers pursue alliances with states in order to keep the lesser partner in-check. The book uses Israel, UK, and Taiwan as examples of how US restrained these states' foreign policies. It might not be a stretch of the imagination to assume that US wanted Japan to remain docile and firmly rooted within its alliance bloc because Japan's defection from the US imperial system could have dramatic consequences for regional security.

[Robohistorian]

Rather than allies, Japan is under US occupation...

[Godstud]

Japan is not under occupation. What nonsense! How can you call yourself 'historian' if you believe bullshit, and want to make up your own narrative?

US occupation of Japan ENDED in 1952. US spent a lot helping to rebuild Japan, after the war. That's HISTORICAL FACT, robohistorian!

Occupation and Reconstruction of Japan, 1945–52
The U.S. perception of international threats had changed so profoundly in the years between 1945 and 1950 that the idea of a re-armed and militant Japan no longer alarmed U.S. officials; instead, the real threat appeared to be the creep of communism, particularly in Asia. The final agreement allowed the United States to maintain its bases in Okinawa and elsewhere in Japan, and the U.S. Government promised Japan a bilateral security pact. In September of 1951, fifty-two nations met in San Francisco to discuss the treaty, and ultimately, forty-nine of them signed it.
https://history.state.gov/milestones/19 ... nstruction

[Robohistorian]

Well, ocuupations last generally 75 years. Germany and Japan are tied with those agreements as a result of invasion. If you ask honest intellectuals in japan and germany they will answer you in this direction. Just because people is not advertising occupation, dont think world is like you see on Television...

Japan is not under occupation. What nonsense! How can you call yourself 'historian' if you believe bullshit, and want to make up your own narrative?

US occupation of Japan ENDED in 1952. US spent a lot helping to rebuild Japan, after the war. That's HISTORICAL FACT, robohistorian!

Occupation and Reconstruction of Japan, 1945–52
The U.S. perception of international threats had changed so profoundly in the years between 1945 and 1950 that the idea of a re-armed and militant Japan no longer alarmed U.S. officials; instead, the real threat appeared to be the creep of communism, particularly in Asia. The final agreement allowed the United States to maintain its bases in Okinawa and elsewhere in Japan, and the U.S. Government promised Japan a bilateral security pact. In September of 1951, fifty-two nations met in San Francisco to discuss the treaty, and ultimately, forty-nine of them signed it.
https://history.state.gov/milestones/19 ... nstruction

[Godstud]

Occupations last 75 years? Where did you get this bullshit from? Where is the evidence of this when it comes to Japan?

Now you're disputing facts by saying it has to do with TV, when I posted a reliable source?

Your conspiracy theories do you a disservice.

More inconvenient facts:
U.S. Relations With Japan
http://www.state.gov/r/pa/ei/bgn/4142.htm

[Robohistorian]

Why people dont think at all and accept what they are handed to them "hey look this is an evidence. It tells everything." No there is no such evidence. You are accepting anything you are told. I talked with germans, japanese, I speak from their mouth. You have no idea about how things are seen in these countries... You are living in a mental cage...

Occupations last 75 years? Where did you get this bullshit from? Where is the evidence of this when it comes to Japan?

Now you're disputing facts by saying it has to do with TV, when I posted a reliable source?

Your conspiracy theories do you a disservice.

More inconvenient facts:
U.S. Relations With Japan
http://www.state.gov/r/pa/ei/bgn/4142.htm

[Godstud]

You are jabbering on about conspiracy theories and not presenting any facts to back up these bullshit theories. I present facts from good sources, and your opinion means fuck all if it isn't backed up with some factual information. Heresay from crackpot Japanese and Germans you have met is nonsense. I know quite a few German friends who live nearby, and I'll ask them if your theory holds water, or not. I have a very good feeling(100%), that they'll simply laugh at the absurdity of such a claim!

So... at your conspiracy theory!

[Baff]

When I have raised the issue of "the rising threat from China" with Mrs Baff She didn't know what I was talking about.
"China?" she said very slowly and quizzically, giving me her uncomprehending look.
I told her how the Americans online were discussing it. She became uncharacteristically rude about Americans.
She said Americans think everyone is a threat, with her little wry smile.

And that was that. The only time in my life she has had a negative word to say about anyone. An unusual outburst from a society more prone to not talking about it, if they do not agree.


@Godstud, rather than ask a German face to face, consider posing your question on a German forum. You may get more open responses.

These people have no choice. They can ask Americans to leave, but Americans won't leave if they do.
They have asked before and Americans have not done so.

Not sure about Germany, But Japan and S Korea and Iraq all asked for Americans to leave. And keep asking.

What did George Bush say "we are not occupiers we will leave if they ask us."
To which the newly appointed Iraqi PM replied "please leave".
Bush said "he had been asking in a private capacity and not as head of state".

S Korea protests, Okinawa protests. No one leaves because they fought too hard to get there. Words aren't enough.

[Godstud]

I don't need to post it on a German forum to know that it's complete and utter BULLSHIT, Baff.

Robohistorian and others have posted no evidence to show that this is so. They have just SAID it. That's meaningless.

[Frollein]

The American use their bases on our territory for a quick hop-and-bomb in the MENA countries. I'd be interested to know if they'd leave when asked, but nobody of our "elite" ever does so, although it is against international law that we allow (ahem...) them to use us like that.

And yes, the opinion that we're still occupied is wide-spread. Not among left-liberals, of course...

I'm a German. In Germany. Who speaks with a lot of other Germans (naturally). But of course Godstud won't accept my comment, although he introduced it as a credibility factor, simply because it doesn't comply with his opinion on the matter.

[Baff]

I don't know what to tell you mate.

I self censor around Americans just as I do many other nationalities. Probably a bit more.

I was at a party in London with some friends from an American Airbase. The subject came up. I spoke without thinking.
I said "The war is over, you can go home now".

In retrospect, this was very rude. I will not say that again.
When I am in the US I self censor even more. There are things that I would happily say to a non American that I would not dream of saying to an American. They are more nationalistic than most. They take criticism less well. So I simply don't.
I just tell them how fabulous they are. And then we all get on like a house on fire.

It's ironic really that in the land of free speech, I am never less able to speak freely. Funny old world.

[Godstud]

But of course Godstud won't accept my comment, although he introduced it as a credibility factor, simply because it doesn't comply with his opinion on the matter.

Do you have any sources, or facts, to back it up. Your opinion is simply not enough to confirm that Germany is occupied, as it falls under heresay, and is not evidence in, and of, itself. I hope you can understand that.

[Robohistorian]

Just wake up dude, you are in a sleeping cell:)