Best Japanese strategic choice with hindsight

Discussions on alternate history, including events up to 20 years before today. Hosted by Terry Duncan.
Locked
User avatar
Takao
Member
Posts: 3776
Joined: 10 Mar 2002, 20:27
Location: Reading, Pa

Re: Best Japanese strategic choice with hindsight

#256

Post by Takao » 04 Jul 2022, 22:13

OpanaPointer wrote:
04 Jul 2022, 22:09
Takao wrote:
04 Jul 2022, 22:06
ljadw wrote:
04 Jul 2022, 21:31
From '' Japan's last ditch force'' a picture of a Japanese soldier training women to defend the homeland with bamboo spears .
From the same source : Admiral Onishi : ''If we are prepared to sacrifice 20 million Japanese lives,victory will be ours .''
Not 2 million .
As I said...The militarists deluded themselves. They said 26 million were "combat capable." Of those 26 million, ONLY 2 million answered the call to arms and were put in uniform.

Read up on Kokumin Giyū Sentōtai.
Anami Korechika said 100,000,000 would die to preserve Yamato. Apparently that would include a lot of Koreans.
Koreans, Chinese, Manchukuoans...

User avatar
Takao
Member
Posts: 3776
Joined: 10 Mar 2002, 20:27
Location: Reading, Pa

Re: Best Japanese strategic choice with hindsight

#257

Post by Takao » 04 Jul 2022, 22:54

ljadw wrote:
04 Jul 2022, 08:04

1 There were no concentration camps in Japan because they were not needed
2 The Hollywood historians who claim that between 1895 and 1937 there was no war between Japan and China,prove that they do not know that before 1937 already there was a big Japanese army in China
3 There was plenty place in Japan itself to hide deserters :thousands of German deserters did hide in Germany, this was also possible for deserters in Japan .
1. Concentration camps were not needed, prisons worked just fine. Although, the Japanese had a good many concentration camps in China, where they were needed.
2. There was a big Japanese Army in Manchukuo since 1931. There was not a big Japanese Army in China 1900-1930
3. Thousands did hide in Japan, China, Manchukuo, Korea, and French Indochina. But, thousands is still a small percentage of the millions under arms. Thousands is even a smaller percentage of the larger German Army.


User avatar
Takao
Member
Posts: 3776
Joined: 10 Mar 2002, 20:27
Location: Reading, Pa

Re: Best Japanese strategic choice with hindsight

#258

Post by Takao » 04 Jul 2022, 23:53

ljadw wrote:
04 Jul 2022, 07:21
1 Politicians do normally not represent the population .And they were not killed because they opposed the war ion China, but because they went not far enough in their support .
There was no general strike in Japan against the military ''coup '',parliament did not demand the withdrawal of the Japanese forces from Korea and China .
How many opponents of the military were arrested, condemned, executed?
2 Where was the Japanese Buchenwald ?
3 There was no 20th July in Japan, no Stauffenberg . The Japanese population supported the regime til the capitulation .
1. The politicians were killed before the 1937 invasion of China...Hard to oppose something that has not happened yet.

There was no general strike, because the Coups all failed. So, like the Nazis, the Japanese militarists took power "legally." There was no general strike in Germany when the Nazis took power " legally" either.

Enough politicians were murdered, that 1930's Japan was termed "Government by assassination."

2. The Japanese "Buchenwald" was in Taiyuan, China.
Although, the Chinese refer to this camp as a Japanese "Auschwitz"

3. There was no July 20th? Of course not...General Hideki Tojo was stripped of all his power on July 18th, 1944. The Japanese got there first, while all the stumblebum Stauffenberg did was injure Hitler...Stauffenberg did not even remove Hitler from power or kill him.

Peter89
Member
Posts: 2369
Joined: 28 Aug 2018, 06:52
Location: Europe

Re: Best Japanese strategic choice with hindsight

#259

Post by Peter89 » 05 Jul 2022, 05:00

ljadw wrote:
04 Jul 2022, 20:43
Why did they not have a free press and free elections?
Very simple : they were Asians, not Americans, they were (and the majority of the world population have still the same opinion) not interested in these things ,they considered them as ideas from foreigners and they despised foreigners .For people in Asia 90 years ago (and still today in a lot of Asian and African countries ) ''liberal '' democracy was a luxury they could not afford .The Afghans support the Taliban , the Japanese supported the military :even the'' socialists'' did not demand the withdrawal from China .
Free press or free elections do not represent the expressions of opinion by the society .
Japanese were not interested in politics ,and that is also so in most countries . People vote following the principle : do ut des :I give you my vote but in return you must give me a (mostly ) material reward ,or in other words : nothing for free .
Law enforcement,institutions of violence are always in the hand of the government,and there is no proof at all that Japanese society wanted to oppose it . The only danger for the military was if the economy would collaps, but in 1941 live in Japan was better than in 1931 : in 1931 the farmers had to sell their daughters as prostitutes to pay their debts . Not in 1941 .That's one of the reasons they supported the government ,the other was the dominant bushido spirit .
The Japanese military ruled with the approval of the Japanese people :there were no strikes, no mass demonstrations against the war in China and the war in the Pacific .Already before PH hundreds of thousands,maybe millions of Japanese young men were sent to China to fight and to die for the emperor .And no one protested.
And the situation would remain the same if the Kempetai did not exist .
Ljdaw you are living in a fantasy. The passive acquiesce of subjects is not willful cooperation, and no amount of propaganda will make it look like that. Western style social development was not enforced on Japan, but Japan took this way on its own. The Taishō period did not happen because some Americans exported democracy in form of carpet bombing and oil concessions: there were no Western military in Japan. And when the military starts to kill elected ministers and prime ministers, you can't say that that's what people wanted. Political parties embodied the people's will. The expression of will is through free elections and the expression of opinion is through free press; yes these things are luxuries in much of the world, but not in Japan before the military literally and figuratively attacked the state.

Law enforcement and institutions of violence are either under the control of the society or the society is under the control of the said bodies. I think it is needless to say which constellation gives a chance for the people's opinion.
"Everything remained theory and hypothesis. On paper, in his plans, in his head, he juggled with Geschwaders and Divisions, while in reality there were really only makeshift squadrons at his disposal."

ljadw
Member
Posts: 15589
Joined: 13 Jul 2009, 18:50

Re: Best Japanese strategic choice with hindsight

#260

Post by ljadw » 05 Jul 2022, 07:58

Takao wrote:
04 Jul 2022, 23:53
ljadw wrote:
04 Jul 2022, 07:21
1 Politicians do normally not represent the population .And they were not killed because they opposed the war ion China, but because they went not far enough in their support .
There was no general strike in Japan against the military ''coup '',parliament did not demand the withdrawal of the Japanese forces from Korea and China .
How many opponents of the military were arrested, condemned, executed?
2 Where was the Japanese Buchenwald ?
3 There was no 20th July in Japan, no Stauffenberg . The Japanese population supported the regime til the capitulation .
1. The politicians were killed before the 1937 invasion of China...Hard to oppose something that has not happened yet.

There was no general strike, because the Coups all failed. So, like the Nazis, the Japanese militarists took power "legally." There was no general strike in Germany when the Nazis took power " legally" either.

Enough politicians were murdered, that 1930's Japan was termed "Government by assassination."

2. The Japanese "Buchenwald" was in Taiyuan, China.
Although, the Chinese refer to this camp as a Japanese "Auschwitz"

3. There was no July 20th? Of course not...General Hideki Tojo was stripped of all his power on July 18th, 1944. The Japanese got there first, while all the stumblebum Stauffenberg did was injure Hitler...Stauffenberg did not even remove Hitler from power or kill him.
1 The invasion of China did not start in 1937 ,but before, long before :when Japan signed the Kellogg Pact in 1928,it was already fighting in China .
2 Taiyuan is not located in Japan .

ljadw
Member
Posts: 15589
Joined: 13 Jul 2009, 18:50

Re: Best Japanese strategic choice with hindsight

#261

Post by ljadw » 05 Jul 2022, 08:47

Peter89 wrote:
05 Jul 2022, 05:00
ljadw wrote:
04 Jul 2022, 20:43
Why did they not have a free press and free elections?
Very simple : they were Asians, not Americans, they were (and the majority of the world population have still the same opinion) not interested in these things ,they considered them as ideas from foreigners and they despised foreigners .For people in Asia 90 years ago (and still today in a lot of Asian and African countries ) ''liberal '' democracy was a luxury they could not afford .The Afghans support the Taliban , the Japanese supported the military :even the'' socialists'' did not demand the withdrawal from China .
Free press or free elections do not represent the expressions of opinion by the society .
Japanese were not interested in politics ,and that is also so in most countries . People vote following the principle : do ut des :I give you my vote but in return you must give me a (mostly ) material reward ,or in other words : nothing for free .
Law enforcement,institutions of violence are always in the hand of the government,and there is no proof at all that Japanese society wanted to oppose it . The only danger for the military was if the economy would collaps, but in 1941 live in Japan was better than in 1931 : in 1931 the farmers had to sell their daughters as prostitutes to pay their debts . Not in 1941 .That's one of the reasons they supported the government ,the other was the dominant bushido spirit .
The Japanese military ruled with the approval of the Japanese people :there were no strikes, no mass demonstrations against the war in China and the war in the Pacific .Already before PH hundreds of thousands,maybe millions of Japanese young men were sent to China to fight and to die for the emperor .And no one protested.
And the situation would remain the same if the Kempetai did not exist .
Ljdaw you are living in a fantasy. The passive acquiesce of subjects is not willful cooperation, and no amount of propaganda will make it look like that. Western style social development was not enforced on Japan, but Japan took this way on its own. The Taishō period did not happen because some Americans exported democracy in form of carpet bombing and oil concessions: there were no Western military in Japan. And when the military starts to kill elected ministers and prime ministers, you can't say that that's what people wanted. Political parties embodied the people's will. The expression of will is through free elections and the expression of opinion is through free press; yes these things are luxuries in much of the world, but not in Japan before the military literally and figuratively attacked the state.

Law enforcement and institutions of violence are either under the control of the society or the society is under the control of the said bodies. I think it is needless to say which constellation gives a chance for the people's opinion.
When military killed politicians, there was no negative reaction of the population .A lot of people didn't know there was a PM or didn't know his name .
''Political parties embodied the people's will '' : THAT is a fantasy .
There is no proof that the Japanese population (mostly farmers and mostly illiterate )wanted Western style social development or even knew that it existed in Japan .
And, about the Taisho period : Journalists,writers, intellectuals, lawyers ( People who talk but who do not work ) were not the Japanese population :as Leon Degrelle ( head of the Belgian Rex movement ) said : il y a une difference entre le pays légal et le pays réel : there is a difference between the legal country and the real country .
Most people in Belgium can't give the name of even one member of the government or even the name of the PM .
Who is listening when a politician is doing blabla on TV ?
And that the expression of will is through free elections is also a very questionable claim . Why does X vote for party A ( better : for candidate A ) and Z for party B ( better :for candidate B ) ?
In France Macron won the presidential elections, but lost te legislative elections . Was this the expression of will of the French people ? How many were voting ?

Peter89
Member
Posts: 2369
Joined: 28 Aug 2018, 06:52
Location: Europe

Re: Best Japanese strategic choice with hindsight

#262

Post by Peter89 » 05 Jul 2022, 10:27

ljadw wrote:
05 Jul 2022, 08:47
Peter89 wrote:
05 Jul 2022, 05:00
ljadw wrote:
04 Jul 2022, 20:43
Why did they not have a free press and free elections?
Very simple : they were Asians, not Americans, they were (and the majority of the world population have still the same opinion) not interested in these things ,they considered them as ideas from foreigners and they despised foreigners .For people in Asia 90 years ago (and still today in a lot of Asian and African countries ) ''liberal '' democracy was a luxury they could not afford .The Afghans support the Taliban , the Japanese supported the military :even the'' socialists'' did not demand the withdrawal from China .
Free press or free elections do not represent the expressions of opinion by the society .
Japanese were not interested in politics ,and that is also so in most countries . People vote following the principle : do ut des :I give you my vote but in return you must give me a (mostly ) material reward ,or in other words : nothing for free .
Law enforcement,institutions of violence are always in the hand of the government,and there is no proof at all that Japanese society wanted to oppose it . The only danger for the military was if the economy would collaps, but in 1941 live in Japan was better than in 1931 : in 1931 the farmers had to sell their daughters as prostitutes to pay their debts . Not in 1941 .That's one of the reasons they supported the government ,the other was the dominant bushido spirit .
The Japanese military ruled with the approval of the Japanese people :there were no strikes, no mass demonstrations against the war in China and the war in the Pacific .Already before PH hundreds of thousands,maybe millions of Japanese young men were sent to China to fight and to die for the emperor .And no one protested.
And the situation would remain the same if the Kempetai did not exist .
Ljdaw you are living in a fantasy. The passive acquiesce of subjects is not willful cooperation, and no amount of propaganda will make it look like that. Western style social development was not enforced on Japan, but Japan took this way on its own. The Taishō period did not happen because some Americans exported democracy in form of carpet bombing and oil concessions: there were no Western military in Japan. And when the military starts to kill elected ministers and prime ministers, you can't say that that's what people wanted. Political parties embodied the people's will. The expression of will is through free elections and the expression of opinion is through free press; yes these things are luxuries in much of the world, but not in Japan before the military literally and figuratively attacked the state.

Law enforcement and institutions of violence are either under the control of the society or the society is under the control of the said bodies. I think it is needless to say which constellation gives a chance for the people's opinion.
When military killed politicians, there was no negative reaction of the population .A lot of people didn't know there was a PM or didn't know his name .
''Political parties embodied the people's will '' : THAT is a fantasy .
There is no proof that the Japanese population (mostly farmers and mostly illiterate )wanted Western style social development or even knew that it existed in Japan .
And, about the Taisho period : Journalists,writers, intellectuals, lawyers ( People who talk but who do not work ) were not the Japanese population :as Leon Degrelle ( head of the Belgian Rex movement ) said : il y a une difference entre le pays légal et le pays réel : there is a difference between the legal country and the real country .
Most people in Belgium can't give the name of even one member of the government or even the name of the PM .
Who is listening when a politician is doing blabla on TV ?
And that the expression of will is through free elections is also a very questionable claim . Why does X vote for party A ( better : for candidate A ) and Z for party B ( better :for candidate B ) ?
In France Macron won the presidential elections, but lost te legislative elections . Was this the expression of will of the French people ? How many were voting ?
LoL.

I told you already: if people choose a goverment and the military assassinates its members, the population can't do anything. But contrary to your lunatic claim, it does not mean that the population agrees or supports the turn of events.

Universal male suffrage was introduced in Japan in 1925, and people did not vote for the bushido / samurai way of living. Your claim was that the people supported the bushido / samurai / suicidal / militarist attitude: why did they vote differently?

I get it that in your view a free election and free press counts for nothing compared to passive obedience, but don't you think that at least you should reconsider what percentage of Japan's population actually wanted to commit suicide - in the mirror of events, ie. 99% didn't do?

Also, don't try to shift the topic to contemporary politics in order to get this thread closed down.
"Everything remained theory and hypothesis. On paper, in his plans, in his head, he juggled with Geschwaders and Divisions, while in reality there were really only makeshift squadrons at his disposal."

User avatar
Takao
Member
Posts: 3776
Joined: 10 Mar 2002, 20:27
Location: Reading, Pa

Re: Best Japanese strategic choice with hindsight

#263

Post by Takao » 05 Jul 2022, 11:39

Peter89 wrote:
05 Jul 2022, 10:27
Also, don't try to shift the topic to contemporary politics in order to get this thread closed down.
Ljadw shifts topics(or moves the goalposts) because he has lost the argument. Never seen him shift topics to get a thread closed down.

User avatar
Takao
Member
Posts: 3776
Joined: 10 Mar 2002, 20:27
Location: Reading, Pa

Re: Best Japanese strategic choice with hindsight

#264

Post by Takao » 05 Jul 2022, 12:42

ljadw wrote:
05 Jul 2022, 07:58
1 The invasion of China did not start in 1937 ,but before, long before :when Japan signed the Kellogg Pact in 1928,it was already fighting in China .
2 Taiyuan is not located in Japan .
1. The US & Britain were fighting in China during 1927, and neither countries military assassinated their politicians to continue a war in China. You need to look deeper, than just going the easy way.

2. Buchenwald was the largest German concentration camp. Taiyuan was the largest Japanese concentration camp.

ljadw
Member
Posts: 15589
Joined: 13 Jul 2009, 18:50

Re: Best Japanese strategic choice with hindsight

#265

Post by ljadw » 05 Jul 2022, 14:31

Peter89 wrote:
05 Jul 2022, 10:27
ljadw wrote:
05 Jul 2022, 08:47
Peter89 wrote:
05 Jul 2022, 05:00
ljadw wrote:
04 Jul 2022, 20:43
Why did they not have a free press and free elections?
Very simple : they were Asians, not Americans, they were (and the majority of the world population have still the same opinion) not interested in these things ,they considered them as ideas from foreigners and they despised foreigners .For people in Asia 90 years ago (and still today in a lot of Asian and African countries ) ''liberal '' democracy was a luxury they could not afford .The Afghans support the Taliban , the Japanese supported the military :even the'' socialists'' did not demand the withdrawal from China .
Free press or free elections do not represent the expressions of opinion by the society .
Japanese were not interested in politics ,and that is also so in most countries . People vote following the principle : do ut des :I give you my vote but in return you must give me a (mostly ) material reward ,or in other words : nothing for free .
Law enforcement,institutions of violence are always in the hand of the government,and there is no proof at all that Japanese society wanted to oppose it . The only danger for the military was if the economy would collaps, but in 1941 live in Japan was better than in 1931 : in 1931 the farmers had to sell their daughters as prostitutes to pay their debts . Not in 1941 .That's one of the reasons they supported the government ,the other was the dominant bushido spirit .
The Japanese military ruled with the approval of the Japanese people :there were no strikes, no mass demonstrations against the war in China and the war in the Pacific .Already before PH hundreds of thousands,maybe millions of Japanese young men were sent to China to fight and to die for the emperor .And no one protested.
And the situation would remain the same if the Kempetai did not exist .
Ljdaw you are living in a fantasy. The passive acquiesce of subjects is not willful cooperation, and no amount of propaganda will make it look like that. Western style social development was not enforced on Japan, but Japan took this way on its own. The Taishō period did not happen because some Americans exported democracy in form of carpet bombing and oil concessions: there were no Western military in Japan. And when the military starts to kill elected ministers and prime ministers, you can't say that that's what people wanted. Political parties embodied the people's will. The expression of will is through free elections and the expression of opinion is through free press; yes these things are luxuries in much of the world, but not in Japan before the military literally and figuratively attacked the state.

Law enforcement and institutions of violence are either under the control of the society or the society is under the control of the said bodies. I think it is needless to say which constellation gives a chance for the people's opinion.
When military killed politicians, there was no negative reaction of the population .A lot of people didn't know there was a PM or didn't know his name .
''Political parties embodied the people's will '' : THAT is a fantasy .
There is no proof that the Japanese population (mostly farmers and mostly illiterate )wanted Western style social development or even knew that it existed in Japan .
And, about the Taisho period : Journalists,writers, intellectuals, lawyers ( People who talk but who do not work ) were not the Japanese population :as Leon Degrelle ( head of the Belgian Rex movement ) said : il y a une difference entre le pays légal et le pays réel : there is a difference between the legal country and the real country .
Most people in Belgium can't give the name of even one member of the government or even the name of the PM .
Who is listening when a politician is doing blabla on TV ?
And that the expression of will is through free elections is also a very questionable claim . Why does X vote for party A ( better : for candidate A ) and Z for party B ( better :for candidate B ) ?
In France Macron won the presidential elections, but lost te legislative elections . Was this the expression of will of the French people ? How many were voting ?
LoL.

I told you already: if people choose a goverment and the military assassinates its members, the population can't do anything. But contrary to your lunatic claim, it does not mean that the population agrees or supports the turn of events.

Universal male suffrage was introduced in Japan in 1925, and people did not vote for the bushido / samurai way of living. Your claim was that the people supported the bushido / samurai / suicidal / militarist attitude: why did they vote differently?

I get it that in your view a free election and free press counts for nothing compared to passive obedience, but don't you think that at least you should reconsider what percentage of Japan's population actually wanted to commit suicide - in the mirror of events, ie. 99% didn't do?

Also, don't try to shift the topic to contemporary politics in order to get this thread closed down.
You refuse to admit the truth : all governments rule with the consent of the people,even dictators : the Germans supported Hitler, no one forced them to vote for Hitler, the Russians supported Stalin .If the Germans had revolted,it was over for Hitler ,if the Russians had revolted,it was over for Stalin .If the Japanese had revolted,it was over for Tojo .
About the Japanese elections before the war : that people voted differently,is irrelevant :was there a bushido, samurai, militarist party ? Besides the ruling parties continued the foreign policy of their predecessors :the Japanese army did not leave China in the 1920s and its atrocities continued .The Seiyukai party supported the occupation of China in the 1920s
And, last but not least : I see that you believe the claim that the Japanese voted for parties and read their electoral programs (better their electoral promises ) : if some one voted for the Japanese socialist party ,that does not mean that he was a member or even supporter of this party .Japanese voted for candidates and preferred a candidate of their region to a foreigner .
The bushido/samurai spirit of the emperor Meiji had not disappeared.
And : about free elections and free press :
everyone knows that what people indicated as their wishes was thrown away by the politicians ,in pre war Japan,and in other countries .Also postwar .
free press : there is no such thing as a free press :a journalist is not free to write what he wants,but must write what his boss orders and his boss follows the orders of his superiors .
In the 1920s most people in Japan did not read a newspaper,because they had not the money to buy the newspaper, because they had not the time to read the newspaper,because they were illiterate and those who could read,had the time,had the money were mostly not interested in politics,but read only the weather forecast,the local news, the sport articles .
And, other point : buying a newspaper that supports party A does not mean that one supports party A .
The influence of the press is a myth,perpetuated by ..journalists to incite people to buy a newspaper.

User avatar
Takao
Member
Posts: 3776
Joined: 10 Mar 2002, 20:27
Location: Reading, Pa

Re: Best Japanese strategic choice with hindsight

#266

Post by Takao » 05 Jul 2022, 20:31

ljadw wrote:
05 Jul 2022, 14:31
You refuse to admit the truth : all governments rule with the consent of the people,even dictators
And that would be a false statement...Not all governments rule with the consent of the people.
ljadw wrote:
05 Jul 2022, 14:31
: the Germans supported Hitler, no one forced them to vote for Hitler,
The Germans never supported Hitler while their were other parties to vote for - they never gained more than 33% of the vote in free and fair elections. Even, the first time the Nazis were allowed to rig the election, the only gained 42% of the vote. It was only after all other political parties were disbanded did the Nazis "win" the "support" of the German people. So, yes, the German people were forced to vote Nazi Party.
ljadw wrote:
05 Jul 2022, 14:31
the Russians supported Stalin .
The Russians "supported" Stalin or they were executed or sent to the Gulag. Even if they supported Stalin, the could be executed or sent to the Gulag. That is not "support", that is "fear."
ljadw wrote:
05 Jul 2022, 14:31
About the Japanese elections before the war : that people voted differently,is irrelevant :was there a bushido, samurai, militarist party ?
Japanese elections pre-war are irrelevant. That the Japanese voted differently is irrelevant. If there was a Bushido, Samurai, Militarist party is also irrelevant.

Bet you do not know why?
ljadw wrote:
05 Jul 2022, 14:31
Besides the ruling parties continued the foreign policy of their predecessors :the Japanese army did not leave China in the 1920s and its atrocities continued .
HINT - The ruling parties were not elected by the Japanese people.
ljadw wrote:
05 Jul 2022, 14:31
The Seiyukai party supported the occupation of China in the 1920s
And 2 Prime Ministers belonging to the Seiyukai Party were assassinated.

ljadw wrote:
05 Jul 2022, 14:31
And, last but not least : I see that you believe the claim that the Japanese voted for parties and read their electoral programs (better their electoral promises ) : if some one voted for the Japanese socialist party ,that does not mean that he was a member or even supporter of this party .Japanese voted for candidates and preferred a candidate of their region to a foreigner .
Irrelevant. The parties the Japanese voted for had now real political power.

ljadw wrote:
05 Jul 2022, 14:31
The bushido/samurai spirit of the emperor Meiji had not disappeared.
It did not dissappear, but it was warped to suit the needs of the militarists.

ljadw wrote:
05 Jul 2022, 14:31
And : about free elections and free press :
everyone knows that what people indicated as their wishes was thrown away by the politicians ,in pre war Japan,and in other countries .Also postwar .
Yet another false statement.
ljadw wrote:
05 Jul 2022, 14:31
free press : there is no such thing as a free press :a journalist is not free to write what he wants,but must write what his boss orders and his boss follows the orders of his superiors .
Still another false statement...A journalist is always free to write what he wants. It might not get published, and he might not be paid for his work...But, he is free to write what he wants.

ljadw wrote:
05 Jul 2022, 14:31
In the 1920s most people in Japan did not read a newspaper,because they had not the money to buy the newspaper, because they had not the time to read the newspaper,because they were illiterate and those who could read,had the time,had the money were mostly not interested in politics,but read only the weather forecast,the local news, the sport articles .
As always...PROOF PLEASE!

ljadw wrote:
05 Jul 2022, 14:31
And, other point : buying a newspaper that supports party A does not mean that one supports party A .
Percentages on probability please.
ljadw wrote:
05 Jul 2022, 14:31
The influence of the press is a myth,perpetuated by ..journalists to incite people to buy a newspaper.
The "influence of the press" does not incite people to buy a newspaper...Never has never will.

ljadw
Member
Posts: 15589
Joined: 13 Jul 2009, 18:50

Re: Best Japanese strategic choice with hindsight

#267

Post by ljadw » 05 Jul 2022, 21:16

about the Germans : no one forced them to become a member of the party ,and notwithstanding this,after Hitler became PM hundreds of thousands of Germans became members of the NSDAP .By their own will .
A German who lived in that period told me : everyone knew that Hitler would instore a dictatorship, but no one cared as long as the social and economic conditions became better . There were in 1933 6 millions of unemployed ,in 1939 600000 unemployed . That's why the Germans supported Hitler;if he had failed to solve the economic problems, it would be over for him .
The Russians supported Stalin because live was better under Stalin than under the Czar .That Hitler and Stalin abolished democracy was irrelevant, because people could not feed their children with democracy .As someone told in 1992 Old Bush who had lost the elections : it is always the economy,you stupid .
What a lot of Americans do not understand is that for most countries democracy,freedom,etc are alien notions ,imposed on them by the Yankees .
A few years ago the IRGC shot hundreds of people who demonstrated .These people did not demonstrate for freedom,but against the high inflation .
It was the same in Japan : people did not oppose Tojo because of his war in Japan,but supported him because the economy was going better .They did not care about alien notions as democracy .
The number of Japanese that were put in prison for their political opinion was almost non existent and the reason is that most Japanese had no political opinions .

ljadw
Member
Posts: 15589
Joined: 13 Jul 2009, 18:50

Re: Best Japanese strategic choice with hindsight

#268

Post by ljadw » 05 Jul 2022, 21:25

About the non existent bond between buying a newspaper and following the political opinion of that newspaper : the Socialist party in Flanders has no newspaper,but is still good for 13 % in the polls .Most socialist voters (which is not the same as socialists ) who buy a newspaper (and they are only a minority ) buy a liberal newspaper :Het Laatste Nieuws, but most people who buy this newspaper do not vote for the Liberal Party .
The AfD is in Germany good for 12 % in the polls,but has no newspaper,its voters buy socialist or christian democrat newspapers .

ljadw
Member
Posts: 15589
Joined: 13 Jul 2009, 18:50

Re: Best Japanese strategic choice with hindsight

#269

Post by ljadw » 05 Jul 2022, 21:42

Takao wrote:
05 Jul 2022, 20:31

ljadw wrote:
05 Jul 2022, 14:31
: the Germans supported Hitler, no one forced them to vote for Hitler,
The Germans never supported Hitler while their were other parties to vote for - they never gained more than 33% of the vote in free and fair elections. Even, the first time the Nazis were allowed to rig the election, the only gained 42% of the vote. It was only after all other political parties were disbanded did the Nazis "win" the "support" of the German people. So, yes, the German people were forced to vote Nazi Party.
ljadw wrote:
05 Jul 2022, 14:31
the Russians supported Stalin .
The Russians "supported" Stalin or they were executed or sent to the Gulag. Even if they supported Stalin, the could be executed or sent to the Gulag. That is not "support", that is "fear."

I see that you think that to vote for Hitler meant to support Hitler .And that is wrong .It was the same in the USSR .
About Stalin : only a small part of the population was going to the Gulag and almost half of them deserved their fate : they were common criminals and not victims of the regime .
Stalin neither Hitler could send the majority of the population to Kolyma/Buchenwald .If hundreds of thousands had revolted, thousands would be shot ,but the regime would collaps ,but hundreds of thousands did not revolt, because they had a job and their children were not starving .
To survive a dictator needs
1 a police to eliminate possible opponents
2 a propaganda department to highlight successes and hide failures
3 successes
And successes are the most important of all .If there are no successes,propaganda can not invent successes and the police can not eliminate opponents,because there will be too many of them .
Communism disappeared in the USSR 30 years ago,not because people wanted democracy but because the economy had collapsed .

User avatar
Takao
Member
Posts: 3776
Joined: 10 Mar 2002, 20:27
Location: Reading, Pa

Re: Best Japanese strategic choice with hindsight

#270

Post by Takao » 05 Jul 2022, 22:09

ljadw wrote:
05 Jul 2022, 21:16
about the Germans : no one forced them to become a member of the party ,and notwithstanding this,after Hitler became PM hundreds of thousands of Germans became members of the NSDAP .By their own will .
About 10% of the German population joined the Nazi Party.
10%, hardly the support of the people.

ljadw wrote:
05 Jul 2022, 21:16
A German who lived in that period told me : everyone knew that Hitler would instore a dictatorship, but no one cared as long as the social and economic conditions became better . There were in 1933 6 millions of unemployed ,in 1939 600000 unemployed . That's why the Germans supported Hitler;if he had failed to solve the economic problems, it would be over for him .
Hitler utterly failed to solve Germany's economic problems. Yet, the German people did not remove him from power in 1941, 1942, 1943, 1944, or 1945.

Was the German population better of in April, 1945, than say, April, 1939?
ljadw wrote:
05 Jul 2022, 21:16
The Russians supported Stalin because live was better under Stalin than under the Czar .That Hitler and Stalin abolished democracy was irrelevant, because people could not feed their children with democracy .
The people could not feed themselves under Hitler in late 1944.
The people could not feed themselves under Stalin, there were more famines under Stalin than there were under the Tsar.
Oddly enough, neither people's revolted against their leaders.

Try again.

ljadw wrote:
05 Jul 2022, 21:16
What a lot of Americans do not understand is that for most countries democracy,freedom,etc are alien notions ,imposed on them by the Yankees .
Your welcome. Your ability to post fact-free falsehoods is unimpeded.
ljadw wrote:
05 Jul 2022, 21:16
A few years ago the IRGC shot hundreds of people who demonstrated .These people did not demonstrate for freedom,but against the high inflation .
Another falsehood. That was one of many reasons for the uprising.

ljadw wrote:
05 Jul 2022, 21:16
It was the same in Japan : people did not oppose Tojo because of his war in Japan,but supported him because the economy was going better .They did not care about alien notions as democracy .
They did not oppose him, because they could not oppose him.
Tojo was not an elected official, and never was.
ljadw wrote:
05 Jul 2022, 21:16
The number of Japanese that were put in prison for their political opinion was almost non existent and the reason is that most Japanese had no political opinions .
WRONG. The reason that most Japanese were never imprisoned, was because, after a few good beatings, they were allowed to recant and be released.

Of course, this policy never really extended to the Chinese, Koreans, Manchurians, etc.

Locked

Return to “What if”