Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
As usual, TonyT, you leave me absolutely envious of the extent of your knowledge and facts about World War II.
Thank you very much. I'm glad you found my post of interest.
Quote:
Originally Posted by NJGOAT
While I think both of the previous posts are very informative and well written, there is still some level of questioning over the exact role that Hirohito played. It was obvious that he was not a simple puppet, but it is also not obvious that he was the direct mastermind. It's no secret that the emperor's position was always tenuous and reliant upon the support base that he formed around himself, particularly that of the military. In that context, the question remains as to whether could Hirohito have really stopped the war or prevented it from happening if he wanted to?
There is much written in Yamamoto's biography about his belief that the emperor was opposed to war but was eventually pressured into it by the military hardliners. Hirohito had grown up believing that his sole mission in life was to defend the throne and institution of the emperor. His biographies all paint this as an undercurrent that governed everything he did. Virtually all of the primary source records that would lend a glimpse into the complex relationship between the emperor, his cabinet and the military were all destroyed. The records that remain are generally personal diaries and of those there are only a few in existence from which the counter-position of a deeply involved, mastermind Hirohito is derived.
Do I think he is innocent? Not in the least.
Do I think he masterminded and drove the whole thing? I'm not convinced. I think Hirohito did what he needed to in order to maintain his position and throne and some of that involved some pretty horrendous things.
To put things in perspective, it’s probably best to go back in history a bit to the reign of Hirohito’s grandfather, the Emperor Meiji. Meiji presided over and can even be said to have been the driving force behind Japan’s transformation from a primarily agricultural society to an industrialized one. It was during his time that the Japanese military was greatly modernized which gave it the ability to launch successful wars against China and Imperial Russia. And despite the existence of the 1889 Constitution, Meiji was the first emperor since the short-lived “Kemmu Restoration” of 1333-36, who did in fact have the ability to exercise direct imperial rule over Japan.
Contrast this with the reign of Meiji’s successor, his son (and Hirohito’s father), the Emperor Taisho. By most accounts, Taisho was not particularly well suited to the role he was asked to perform and lacked the strength to exert his will over Japan as his father had. Because of this, Japan during the time of Emperor Taisho functioned more along the lines of a constitutional monarchy as democratic principles of government began to take root. By 1919, Taisho, who had suffered poor health since childhood, began to exhibit signs of serious mental deterioration. As the emperor’s behavior became more erratic and a source of embarrassment to the imperial family, Taisho was kept in isolation at the palace. When it became clear that Taisho could no longer exercise his imperial duties, Hirohito was appointed regent for his father on November 25, 1921. From that point forward until his death on December 25, 1926, Taisho was nothing more than a figurehead.
When Hirohito first came to power, the government continued to function much as it did during his father’s reign, with Hirohito attempting to abide by the admonitions from his childhood teachers that the job of an emperor is to “reign but not rule”. However, this was not really compatible with the other lesson he was taught, which was that his grandfather, Meiji, represented the ideal of what an emperor should be, and as such, Hirohito should strive to emulate him. As the 1930’s brought increasing instability and internal strife to Japan, Hirohito’s solution was to try and have it both ways. He would reign, but when he deemed it necessary, he would also rule. And so it was when issues were presented to the emperor that he was in accord with but did not wish to be a direct party to, he would retreat behind the excuse of being a “constitutional monarch” and rubber stamp the decisions of his ministers. Yet when it came to things like military and territorial expansion and war, Hirohito followed in the footsteps of his grandfather and became directly involved in the decision making process. And this is essentially how Hirohito conducted himself as emperor from 1937 to 1945.
All things considered, I would agree that Hirohito was by no means the “mastermind” behind everything. A more accurate characterization, and the one which I was trying to portray in my original post, would be that of Hirohito as a more than willing accomplice to those, like Tojo, who wished to turn Japan into an imperialist power that would dominate Asia.
Location: The western periphery of Terra Australis
24,544 posts, read 56,047,835 times
Reputation: 11862
From stories I've heard it was very, very grim for both POW's and civilians in captured territories.
Personally my grandparents, Singaporeans, experienced Japanese rule first hand, although fortunately they escaped severe oppression. The Japanese killed many civilians; many ethnic Chinese in particular were killed because the Japanese feared they might be anti-Japanese or have grievances over what the Japanese did to the Chinese, e.g. the rape of Nanking. Many of the POW's taken during the Fall of Singapore were interned and the survival rate was pretty horrendous. Many were taken to build the infamous Burma Railroad.
Not to defend Japan or anything but why should we care whether the Japanese own up to their crimes? Very few people of any nation ever own up to their crimes unless forced to like Germany. I see few Americans ever own up to their crimes in the Philippines (some of which was just as brutal as the crimes the Japanese committed during the Bataan Death March)and Haiti. The Russians, Chinese, Dutch, and the Belgians aren't that different as well from the Japanese in more or less hiding their crimes. Also, this topic has strayed a little in that it doesn't discuss what life was like in Japan during that era. I also hope you don't actually really think Americans care about the dead Chinese in Nanking because most don't and didn't (they only lifted anti-Chinese immigration laws in the 60s) since the Chinese are now more or less considered the enemy and were also considered racially inferior and feared as the "Yellow Peril".
Because one must learn from their past mistakes to avoid repeating those mistakes. USA has made mistakes in the past and the subject of those mistakes are openly discussed and debated in our universities, written about in books and online, and is of historical record. However, some nations refuse to acknowledge the horrors committed in the past. Turkey's dealings with the Kurds, Austria's welcoming of the Nazis with open arms and their attacks on Jews, and the many war crimes and horrors committed by Japan (in some cases, using POWs as a source of food.
Because one must learn from their past mistakes to avoid repeating those mistakes. USA has made mistakes in the past and the subject of those mistakes are openly discussed and debated in our universities, written about in books and online, and is of historical record. However, some nations refuse to acknowledge the horrors committed in the past. Turkey's dealings with the Kurds, Austria's welcoming of the Nazis with open arms and their attacks on Jews, and the many war crimes and horrors committed by Japan (in some cases, using POWs as a source of food.
This is the essense of it. The US had begun to deal with it's past. Maybe not perfectly but we don't hide it away. The Trail of Tears isn't justified by anyone anymore. The Germans *teach* their children about the Holocaust. Other nations deal with the reality that it happened. Japan does not.
A group of surviving American POW's who ended up as slave laborors in Japan were invited to come for a ceremony by the Japanese government to commemrate the dead. They did but ask one simple thing, an apology. They didn't want money, just an acknowlegment that a wrong was done to them and that Japan took responsibility.
They didn't get it. They didn't attend the ceremony by choice but did meet the Japanese people of today. They did not hate them either, but found them good people--but ignorant ones. Japan does not teach what it did to its captives or those in occupied lands. They wish to remember the dead of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, but not the horrendous slow torture with which they treated other human beings. The wouldn't apologise since they still see nothing wrong.
This is essencially the difference between the Japanese and *most* of the world. You can't go back and change it but you can acknowlege it and admit it was wrong. But only if you teach it and believe that.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
