japantoday > letters

Letters to the Editor

editor@japantoday.com

More on Japan and the confederacy

Thank you all for your responses to my article. It was most gratifying to read them. I think they are, on balance, among the best that Japan Today has generated so far.

I won't respond to most of them. In some cases they need no response. In others a response would do no good. Cases can be made for referring to the US's 1861-5 conflict as a Civil War, or as a war between the States (most of the units that fought in it, on both sides, were state militia), but anyone who talks about "The War of Northern Aggression" is simply not interested in truth.

I have no intention of responding to all the straw men that have been constructed and all the red herrings that have been fished up. My article was too long to begin with, and to have done justice to the comparison of both conflicts would have made it even longer.

However, a few comments are in order, especially since they have not been done justice in this discussion. The comparison of Atlanta with Hiroshima (and Columbia with Nagasaki?) is strained. (General Sherman ordered civilians out of Atlanta before he destroyed it.) However, it points to another, more apt comparison: Pearl Harbor with Fort Sumter.

The plain fact is that if you attack the United States, Americans go ballistic. If you don't believe me, ask Tim McVeigh. And for Americans to attack their own country is unquestionably treason.

As the U.S. Constitution says, "Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort."

As for the legality of secession, "This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding." I think that "any Thing" would cover Ordinances of Secession.

Another parallel between these two wars that has yet to be discussed here is the effect these wars had on the young men who participated in them. Robert E Lee once said something to the effect that it is good that war is so terrible, else we should grow too fond of it.

Unfortunately all young men who participate in wars do not share this great general's sentiments. Mothers spend years trying to teach their sons to control their violent instincts, only to have their lessons brushed aside by military training. Some young men simply cannot stop shooting up the territory after they've been trained and encouraged to do it.

The American frontier lasted from 1607 until sometime in the 1880s, but the "Wild West" was the generation after the Civil War. They didn't have terms like "post traumatic stress disorder" when Jesse James was robbing banks and trains, so he ended up with a bullet in his skull. I guess those who live by the six gun will die by the six gun.

I didn't see "Merdeka," but I saw the trailer. By the way, if you think this film is welcomed by Indonesia you should call the embassy. The Japan Times did, and found that Indonesia is very upset about the film. It was made by the same people who brought us "Pride." (What's next? "Springtime for Hitler"?)

I find it hard to believe that thousands of young soldiers who had been fighting for the expansion of the Japanese empire suddenly became principled anti-imperialists. More likely they just enjoyed shooting up the scenery and didn't want to go back home. It's happened before and it will happen again, as long as humans fight wars.

John Edward Philips

September 9, 2001

Related Articles

Japan's war aggression and the Confederacy

Post Your Opinion!

Interesting dananator  (Sep 14 2001 - 20:35)

"The plain fact is that if you attack the United States, Americans go ballistic."

Thanks for the nice letter Hiko  (Sep 14 2001 - 21:14)

But, my friend, you are a moron. I could tell that there are a lot of Civil War nuts on this site, with the number of discussions on immigration and racism in Japan that turn into detailed analysis of the psychological state of Civil War leaders during key moments of the conflict. Therefore, it seemed like a great opportunity, to look at the parallels between the Pacific War and the US Civil War. As you said above, there were opportunities to compare the beginning of the war and atom bombings and the like. But in the end, you simply compared your detailed, impressive knowledge of the US Civil War with a movie trailer you seemed to find hard to believe. I was looking forward to a tying together of the obvious depth of knowledge people here have on Japan related issues and of US Civil War issues, but instead it was just a Civil War article with an uninformed opportunistic swipe at Japan in the end. I suppose you don't believe that the allies fought to liberate Europe from the Nazis - they just liked "shooting up the scenery and didn't want to go back home". I don't mind you expressing your opinion, but from an article supposedly linking the two events, I was hoping for something more than a flippant comment like that loosely tying the events together. The veterans of the war in Indonesia are still alive, and it is a fascinating topic - you do it an injustice. A shame. Glad to see many of the posters had useful contributions to make to compensate.

I can't believe this response is here! JohnPhilips  (Jul 15 2002 - 16:26)

A few days after this letter appeared the World Trade Center was attacked, the bottom fell out of the Confederate flag market, Gary Condit fell off the US media's radar for a few months and most people, including me, lost interest in this topic. On September 14 I was putting something entirely different on the Internet, at http://human.cc.hirosaki-u.ac.jp/philips/wttower.htm Months later I happened to cruise around the JT website and found that not only had they printed my letter, but there were actually two responses. Damnator saw the only relevance it had, and could be accused of belaboring the obvious. Hikozaemon, on the other hand, seems unable to appreciate the obvious, even when it is staring in his face. I never replied to your earlier message Hiko, because it was too silly. In your response to the original article you wrote "the post war support of many Japanese individuals of the Indonesian nationalists fight against the Dutch re-establishing control of Indonesia following Japan's defeat I believe was genuine, and Indonesia is still greatful to Japan for it." (Just as a friendly warning, you should learn to spell before you call others morons.) Indonesia has a democratically elected government which has publicly condemned this film and the perspective behind it. Who elected you, Hikozaemon, to speak for the people of Indonesia? Perhaps you went there and were flattered, as tourists often are, by someone telling you what they thought you wanted to hear. I'm sorry that you are so right wing that your sympathies to the Axis show through so obviously, even when you are in a former colonial country. When you are older you will learn that everything people tell you is not their true feeling. That's why democratic countries have secret ballots. I hope you will also learn that old geezers who've wasted their lives will try to justify their failings by pretending there was something noble about them, but you will probably become one of those people yourself. If you take at face value the self-justifications of those Japanese who couldn't stop fighting and stayed in Indonesia after the war, well, I know some Nigerians who want to put millions of dollars in your bank account if you give them the number. To compare the veterans who went home when the war was over with those who didn't shows you simply don't understand the issues. If you spent half the time reading and educating yourself that you spend posting messages to the Japan Today website, you might write something worth reading. But I don't expect anything soon.

John Edward Phillips, Greatful for the coments Hiko  (Jul 23 2002 - 09:42)

hahaa, yes, I made a spelling mistake, got me - I shot off a quick response wihtout checking and that was sloppy. Humblest apologies. One, I don't expect that you read what I usually write - so I'll let you in on what most others here probably already know by now. 1) I am not Japanese 2) I am a violent rabid anti-right winger 3) I hate nothing more than the opportunity for a good argument to be squandered. It was a long time ago (a year) but I still remember your thread as a huge waste of time (tongue in cheek - but respond to my criticisms because I will reitterate them as reasonably as I can). Whether Indonesia is a democracy now is up for debate. It has had one very shaky democratic election which failed to meet EU standards for transperancy in third world nation elections, and it's sitting president was not elected (well, she was, but the result was ignored first, and she was installed later) on top of being the daughter of a partisan who fought alongside the Japanese to 'liberate' Indonesia from the Dutch after the war (a noble cause, but Sukarno was a scumbag any way you look at it). Firstly, South East Asian leaders can't go around openly praising Japan because (at least in the case of Malaysia) they have Chinese constituents. But Mahatir, Sukarno, Suharto were all clear that they felt no need on pressing Japan for apologies. But make no mistake, and feel free to correct me if you can find a source saying otherwise - Japanese sided with Indonesian partisans (including President Sukarno himself) against the Dutch when they invaded Indonesia, and many remained to support them afterwards (exactly what the movie is about). I would suggest to you that if the Japanese who remained had merely wanted to stay in Indonesia to 'shoot up the scenery' as you so condescendingly put it, they would have found far more Javan Indonesians to kill than white Dutch and ethnic Chinese. Why would they have given up on the chance to stop having all that 'fun' (as you seem to think they were having). As an analogy, it is like saying that the Americans, after liberating France could have just decided to start shooting up French and the scenery there. If the American soldiers did not remain in France, or start randomly shooting French people, logic suggests that they were there for a different reason. The Japanese government had no policy of remaining in South East Asia after the war. Those who remained did so as individuals. Do you think that every one of those soldiers was only fighting for Japan because of the emperor and the chance to throw a few babies onto bayonetts (Hollywood wartime propaganda films still colour racist misperceptions about the Japanese as being sneaky, closet emperor worshipping potential baby killers)? Is that why US soldiers fought? Or German soldiers fought? Truth is, many soldiers believe in the reasons they are given for fighting. I don't doubt that many Germans on the Eastern Front, at first at least, believed they were correcting the injustices of Versailles, rather than purely because Hitler sent them. I also believe that US soldiers geniunely wanted to liberate Europe from German domination, and not just shoot up scenery or fight for Roosevelt/Truman. Does either of these views make me a right-winger? Well then, I have met war veterans, and it may surprise you to learn that I found most of them to be neither like versions of Darth Vader, nor mindless emperor obeying storm-troopers. The propaganda that Japan put to its troops justifying the war was (on top of the Hitler worship style promotion of the emperor) - The war was to prevent European domination of Japan - The war was to liberate East Asia from European domination Whether or not the war really was about undoing injustice, liberating Europe, or liberating Asia is immaterial - at the top level of command, motives are usually more complex (and tied to economics more often than not). In the civil war itself, both sides held out moral positions - the South was arguing for economic freedom and freedom from onerous Federal control of states, and the North was fighting for the moral issue of the abolition of slavery. Whether or not the motives at the top of the chain of command were as simple as that is up for debate - but I don't doubt that the soldiers on both sides of the war at least believed in the moral aspect of their side - it would seem ridiculous to lay down your life purely for allegiance to a leader or for the good of your State's economy. Yet that is how you dismiss Japan. You seem to group all 50 million or so Taiwanese, Manchurian, Korean and Japanese imperial army soldiers as brainwashed or simply evil people who overran Asia for want of something better to do. The experiences and motives of those soldiers make fascinating reading (something you seem to be lacking in) and if sitting and listening to a few old men's stories makes me a right-winger, so be it. I don't condone the terrible things many Japanese did in Indonesia, particularly to the Chinese. But to dismiss Japanese soldiers in WWII as a bunch of derranged emperor worshipping paintball playing wannabes reflects something worse than a lack of knowledge of history - a total lack of interest. And that, my friend, is the terrible waste I found missing from your otherwise irrelevant but moderately interesting article. (apologies in advance for any spelling errors) Peace

hiko Assasin  (Jul 24 2002 - 07:23)

bullshit the south fought tho preserve slavery. plain as the nose on my hungover face

Yappari! JohnPhilips  (Aug 21 2002 - 21:22)

I figured you haunted your old messages. You are a little too enamored of your writing and a little to averse to reading. I can't really respond to you until you respond to what I actually wrote, instead of what you wish I had written. e.g.: "I am not Japanese" I never thought, much less said, you were. "Whether Indonesia is a democracy now is up for debate." The same debate could be made about any country, even the US after the last election in Florida. However, my point was that no one elected you to speak for the people of Indonesia. Neither have you shown that any major section of Indonesian thought supports the perspective of this movie. You spoke only for yourself, yet presumed to speak for the people of Indonesia. "South East Asian leaders can't go around openly praising Japan" Say what?!? Mahatir's "Look East" policy is, IMHO, rather blindly pro-Japanese. "Japanese sided with Indonesian partisans" AAMOF, more Japanese troops fought against Indonesian independence after the war than for it. Indonesia got independence for several reasons, among them that the Dutch themselves were sick of colonialism after their own occupation by Nazi Germany, the fact that the mystique of white supremacy had been broken by Japanese invasion, and the fact that the US feared that if Sukarno were not given power the Communist insurrection would be successful instead. Had Japanese troops who remained in Indonesia been decisive, Indonesia would still be Dutch. But most Japanese troops, like most troops everywhere, in any war, were just glad the fighting was over, and glad to be able to go home. Only a very few stayed, just as only a very few joined Jesse James after the American Civil War. "Yet that is how you dismiss Japan." I don't dismiss Japan. I just don't confuse it with either its militarist junta of the early Showa era or a few veterans who couldn't stop fighting. "the North was fighting for the moral issue of the abolition of slavery" I don't even know where to start with this. The Union, which many southerners fought for, was fighting for its life, because it had been attacked. The attempted extension of slavery was the cause of that attack, and slavery was abolished because ending slavery and enlisting slaves in the Union military was the only way to save the Union. I could go on, but you really need to learn some US history before you talk about it. Not that your grasp of other history is any better. "The experiences and motives of those soldiers make fascinating reading" I'm sure they do. So do Tolkien, Heinlein, and many other authors. That doesn't make them true. However, if you had as much trouble reading them as you did reading me, you must have misunderstood them terribly. You're going to have to learn to read before you can write, and spelling is the least of your problems. Contact me off-web if you want to continue the discussion. You really shouldn't embarrass yourself publicly like this.

Post Your Opinion!

Post Your Opinion

If you already have an account, please login.
Otherwise, please take a minute to register.

Registration allows you to have a unique User Name on the discussion board of Japan Today and in forum.japantoday.com!

Registration takes less than one minute. We respect your privacy and will not sell your email address to third parties without your permission.

Please address technical questions to bbs@japantoday.com.

Thank you!

Back