I am so disappointed in your quality of journalism written by Barry Petersen on the “Japan's Nonstop Amnesia” posted on April 13th 2005. The last half of the article is very biased, especially, from the part of “Let's take what historians call the "Rape of Nanjing" because that's my personal favorite for ongoing Japanese denial.”
He wrote this article to support his opinion only based on the book “Rape of Nanjing”, which is considered to be sensational but inaccurate as a historical source.
It is obvious your journalists have not researched the background and the latest information about this controversial issue. It seems like they cannot understand the Japanese language to have read the actual textbooks written about this part of history, nor comprehend and report the past Prime Ministers’ thirty-three official apologies and what the ODA is. At least, they should know that the Japanese government does not control information and does not write the actual textbooks unlike Communist China. In Japan, it is based on the American system, if they did not know it.
It would appear that this story was influenced directly from the Chinese government, could this influence be based on the writer’s career history and personal interest to distort the truth?
Journalism should be neutral and lack of opinion with the goals of integrity that do not undermine its audience. CBS is losing viewers, including my family, because of the poor and inaccurate quality of journalism.
同じ５大ネットワークでもMSNBCの記事。 China-Japan rivalry heats up 同じ日に出た記事なのに、これは上記のCBSに比べちゃんとリサーチしており、３ページにわたる分析的かつ客観的なリポートだ。今まで何もこの問題を知らなかったアメリカ人には、丁度良い第三者的な情報になっている。
Let's take what historians call the "Rape of Nanjing" because that's my personal favorite for ongoing Japanese denial.
Did it happen? Outside of Japan - especially in China - there seems remarkably little dispute. But in Japan the textbooks often refer to this incident, if at all, by saying "many lives were lost" with no numbers, or worse, a glossed over and now familiar phrase that "the historical facts are in dispute."
Do not, for a second, consider that this whitewash is confined to textbooks. I've interviewed members of Japan's Parliament who say exactly the same thing, that the historical facts are in dispute.
So what's up here?
Simply put - Japan feels to apologize might suggest it was somehow wrong or evil during the war. And to obscure the issue even more cleverly, it simply ignores the parts of history that prove the evil that was Japanese occupation.
So Japanese go to school and learn a history sanitized of the realities of Japanese atrocities.
Want a contrast? Try Germany, which not only openly apologized for the war, the concentration camps, the brutality of its rule, but honestly and starkly teaches each German generation in the belief that each generation must know and understand what went wrong - so it won't go wrong again.
And more - it has preserved the concentration camps so not only its own people, but the rest of us, can visit and see and understand just how this genocide worked with horrible efficiency.
Not so, the Japanese.
This comes as a time when Japan can ill afford to offend China. The Japanese economy, sliding downward for more than a decade, is back in one of its periodic stalls. China is the engine that can help. Newly rich Chinese buy Japanese exports or purchase Japanese goods manufactured in China.
So Japanese business took note when some of the Chinese demonstrations were aimed at Japanese stores or goods in stores made in Japan.
Will it change Japan's attitude? Probably not. Nationalism trumps economics in Japan, without fail.
How much longer will Japan continue to whitewash its history? Well, we're at 60 years since the end of the war and still counting, and as recent events show, there are no signs of change by the Japanese.
If we were talking about a person, we'd suggest he or she get some counseling for being in denial.
Alas, there is no psychiatric couch big enough for a whole nation in denial.
"More people have dropped ACC350 than I had anticipated. I know several additional students are thinking about dropping the class before the unrestricted deadline. Given the unexpected situation I think it is reasonable to raise the curve for the class from 77% to 80%. I will look at the grades after the third exam and curve up to 80%. Right now the class average is ~ 76%. So, at this point I would apply a 4% curve in estimating the grades. "