Foreign Volunteers in Imperial Japan Army?
-
- Member
- Posts: 374
- Joined: 19 Apr 2014, 09:49
- Location: earth
Re: Foreign Volunteers in Imperial Japan Army?
Thank you again for the story of the askari and the pictures, which I have never seen before. The askari was very brave, as many askaris from Eritrea were when they were in Italian service. Also noted is that the facist Italians were at least ostensibly much less racist than Nazis, as they recognized the colonial soldier's bravery, while as I recall, the Nazis treated former German askaris living in Germany with contempt and discrimination.
Re: Foreign Volunteers in Imperial Japan Army?
Maybe not against blacks, but Italian fascists could be just as racist as Nazis elsewhere. Mussolini himself referred to Slavs as barbarian and inferior. We need only to look at Italy's actions in Jugoslavia to see how this sentiment was put into practice... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Italian_w ... Yugoslaviabertamingo wrote: ↑10 Jan 2019, 01:57Also noted is that the facist Italians were at least ostensibly much less racist than Nazis
It's important to remember that, at this time, Italy had colonies in Africa, while Germany did not. Italians thus may have had more reason to treat Africans from their colonies with a milder attitude (once they became obedient to Italy), because Italy could still rely on colonial subjects to fight for them.
Let's not forget, by the way, how Mussolini referred to his colonial expeditions in Africa as a mission to "bring civilization to backward lands." Just because some Askaris were awarded with medals for fighting under Italian flag, we shouldn't kid ourselves that Fascist Italy didn't view Africans as inferior at this time.
-
- Member
- Posts: 374
- Joined: 19 Apr 2014, 09:49
- Location: earth
Re: Foreign Volunteers in Imperial Japan Army?
Of course you're right about fascist Italy still being racist, I totally agree. What I suggested was only that, in comparison with Nazis, the Italian fascists treated their African askaris with a much less racist stance. There must have been practical purposes like you've mentioned, e.g. motivating askaris to fight for Italy, that's why I used the phrase 'at least ostensibly'.koczownik wrote: ↑10 Jan 2019, 21:50Maybe not against blacks, but Italian fascists could be just as racist as Nazis elsewhere. Mussolini himself referred to Slavs as barbarian and inferior. We need only to look at Italy's actions in Jugoslavia to see how this sentiment was put into practice... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Italian_w ... Yugoslaviabertamingo wrote: ↑10 Jan 2019, 01:57Also noted is that the facist Italians were at least ostensibly much less racist than Nazis
It's important to remember that, at this time, Italy had colonies in Africa, while Germany did not. Italians thus may have had more reason to treat Africans from their colonies with a milder attitude (once they became obedient to Italy), because Italy could still rely on colonial subjects to fight for them.
Let's not forget, by the way, how Mussolini referred to his colonial expeditions in Africa as a mission to "bring civilization to backward lands." Just because some Askaris were awarded with medals for fighting under Italian flag, we shouldn't kid ourselves that Fascist Italy didn't view Africans as inferior at this time.
Basically it's like saying, sth has a smell which is less digusting than faeces. It doesn't mean that 'sth' has a good smell.
Re: Foreign Volunteers in Imperial Japan Army?
That's true. I think the practical realities of the war pushed otherwise racist regimes to make some concessions in order to supplement their armies. Despite having the 'worse smell', even the Nazis weren't above hypocritical use of non-whites (like Indische Legion and Turkestan Legion soldiers) in their wars of Germanic conquest. Obviously for these soldiers it was an "enemy of my enemy" case, but for Nazi Germany it just makes them look like an even bigger bunch of a*hole. "Sure, you can die for us, but we're still the master race."bertamingo wrote: ↑11 Jan 2019, 02:05Of course you're right about fascist Italy still being racist, I totally agree. What I suggested was only that, in comparison with Nazis, the Italian fascists treated their African askaris with a much less racist stance. There must have been practical purposes like you've mentioned, e.g. motivating askaris to fight for Italy, that's why I used the phrase 'at least ostensibly'.
Basically it's like saying, sth has a smell which is less digusting than faeces. It doesn't mean that 'sth' has a good smell.
Anyway, I don't want to drag this topic too much from the original by talking about European Axis and their colonials/foreign volunteers. If we are on the subject of the Axis and racism, getting back to Japan, perhaps we could argue they were the even less officially racist than Italy. It is no denying they treated non-Japanese as second class during the war, but one of their most famous puppet states (Manchukuo) was built as a multi-ethnic state that even included some non-Asians (e.g. Russian Emigres) in its fraternity. Again, I think this is a case of practicalities taking precedence over racism. Japan saw the use of people like Inner Mongols, White Russians, Buryats, etc. to fight the Soviets and Chinese, so they allowed them some concessions (like their own ethnic military units and special administrative organisations) in exchange for loyalty to Japan's war effort.
-
- Member
- Posts: 374
- Joined: 19 Apr 2014, 09:49
- Location: earth
Re: Foreign Volunteers in Imperial Japan Army?
I think so too, even the most racist Axis: Nazi Germany had sought to use the peoples on its racial discrimination list to fight for it. Nazis constituted the worst racist case among the 3 major Axis, while fascist Italy and imperial Japan were ostensibly less racist than Nazis, for practical reasons. Nonetheless, all 3 were notoriously evil.koczownik wrote: ↑12 Jan 2019, 00:03That's true. I think the practical realities of the war pushed otherwise racist regimes to make some concessions in order to supplement their armies. Despite having the 'worse smell', even the Nazis weren't above hypocritical use of non-whites (like Indische Legion and Turkestan Legion soldiers) in their wars of Germanic conquest. Obviously for these soldiers it was an "enemy of my enemy" case, but for Nazi Germany it just makes them look like an even bigger bunch of a*hole. "Sure, you can die for us, but we're still the master race."bertamingo wrote: ↑11 Jan 2019, 02:05Of course you're right about fascist Italy still being racist, I totally agree. What I suggested was only that, in comparison with Nazis, the Italian fascists treated their African askaris with a much less racist stance. There must have been practical purposes like you've mentioned, e.g. motivating askaris to fight for Italy, that's why I used the phrase 'at least ostensibly'.
Basically it's like saying, sth has a smell which is less digusting than faeces. It doesn't mean that 'sth' has a good smell.
Anyway, I don't want to drag this topic too much from the original by talking about European Axis and their colonials/foreign volunteers. If we are on the subject of the Axis and racism, getting back to Japan, perhaps we could argue they were the even less officially racist than Italy. It is no denying they treated non-Japanese as second class during the war, but one of their most famous puppet states (Manchukuo) was built as a multi-ethnic state that even included some non-Asians (e.g. Russian Emigres) in its fraternity. Again, I think this is a case of practicalities taking precedence over racism. Japan saw the use of people like Inner Mongols, White Russians, Buryats, etc. to fight the Soviets and Chinese, so they allowed them some concessions (like their own ethnic military units and special administrative organisations) in exchange for loyalty to Japan's war effort.