Whether the debate on the ability to attack enemy bases is a matter of propriety, possession is an issue, or start is an issue - possession is an issue.
2022-05-12
Category:Japan I'm participating in the ranking.Please click and cheer for me.
What is the issue regarding the ability to attack enemy bases
The debate over the ability to attack enemy bases has led to confusion in public opinion regarding whether it is permissible to attack enemy bases, whether it is permissible to possess such weapons, and what stage refers to the initiation of an enemy attack. appear. Looking at the government's views so far, it has consistently been stated that the ability to attack enemy bases falls within the scope of defense, and the government has also made clear its views on launching such attacks. The question is whether or not to actually own it .
Issues regarding the ability to attack enemy bases
[Possibility] Is it okay to attack enemy bases (enemy territory)?
[Initiation] What is the initiation of an attack by an enemy country (activation conditions)?
[Holding] When and what to hold
Regarding the ability to attack enemy bases, Prime Minister Ichiro Hatoyama already answered in １９５６ that in the event of a missile attack, ``It is inconceivable that the purpose of the Constitution is to sit back and wait for self-destruction.'' Since then, the Japanese government has continued to interpret it as constitutionally permissible.
１９５６ Ichiro Hatoyama
The purpose of the Constitution is that if an imminent illegal violation is committed against our country, and if a guided missile or other attack is carried out on our land as a means of such violation, we should sit back and wait for our own destruction. I don't think I can think of it that way. In such cases, take the minimum necessary measures to prevent such attacks, for example, as long as it is recognized that there is no other way to defend against attacks by guided missiles, etc. I believe that hitting bases with guided missiles is legally within the scope of self-defense and should be possible.
In １９９９, Defense Agency Director General Norota responded that the Self-Defense Forces would use the necessary force if there was a threat of an armed attack.
１９９９ Yoshinari Norota
In situations that do not result in an armed attack against our country, police agencies are primarily responsible for dealing with the situation, but in cases where the general police force cannot respond, the Self-Defense Forces respond by dispatching public order, and are not responsible for suppressing the situation. It's possible. an armed attack against our country or the possibility of such attack, a defense operation is ordered, and the Self-Defense Forces will use the necessary force to defend our country. That's why .
In ２００３, regarding the launch of an attack on Japan, Director-General of the Defense Agency Ishiba announced that he would turn Tokyo into a sea of fire, and stated that if Japan began injecting fuel, this would be considered the start.
Read it together
Geographically, the Korean Peninsula is covered by the Chinese continent, and successive Korean dynasties have become vassal states - What is Japan's position from the perspective of the continental p
Geographically, the Korean Peninsula is covered by mainland China
A vassal state of China since its founding
Korea continues to be invaded by China
China and Korea were ruled by different ethnic groups
Seeing history from the perspective of northern peoples
South Korea only denounces Japanese rule
The Korean Peninsula has a history that is inseparable from China, as the peninsula's geographical characteristics make it look like it is completely covered by the Chinese continent.
What exactly is this sense of victimhood and hostility toward Japan that Korean people have? The historical differences between China and Japan seen from South Korea are largely due to geopolitical reasons as seen from a map, but that is not the only reason. I would like to think about it in terms of the dominant ethnic group and the ruled ethnic group.
Legend has it that there were countries called Dangun Joseon and Minojo Joseon, but archaeologically it is said that they existed from the later Eishi Joseon.
The legendary Mino Korea is said to have been founded by the Mino of the Shang Dynasty in China, and the Wei Dynasty Joseon is said to have been founded by the Wei clan of the Yan Dynasty in China. Both were founded as vassal states of China.
After that, Goguryeo, Baekje, and Silla entered the Three Kingdoms period, and then the Sui Dynasty invaded Koguryo, and the Tang Dynasty invaded Koguryo.
Although Goryeo established a unified dynasty, it was placed under the control of the Later Tang Dynasty shortly after its founding. During the Yuan Dynasty, China was invaded by the Mongol Empire and became a vassal state. The Allied Forces of Mongolia and Goryeo invaded Japan twice, but failed.
Lee Seong-gye, who founded the Joseon Dynasty, is also known as the Jurchen people, and the Jurchen people were an ethnic group that lived in the Manchuria region, and later Hong Taiji founded the Qing Dynasty in China.
From China's point of view, the Korean people are recognized as a different ethnic group living outside the Great Wall of China, and these ethnic groups lived primarily as nomadic peoples, but due to the geographical relationship of the peninsula, the Korean people have decided to settle down. It seems that it has become.
Northern ethnic groups such as the Xiongnu, Xianbei, Khitan, Jurchen, Manchu, and Mongolians were a threat not only to the Han Chinese in China, but also to the Koreans.
Looking at the history of China, there have been only a handful of unified dynasties founded by the Han Chinese, who make up the majority of the country, and for most of its history, different ethnic groups have ruled the Chinese mainland.
When I look at world history, I have never seen a history centered on northern peoples, but if I dare to look at it from that perspective, both China and the Korean peninsula were invaded and dominated by northern peoples.
The Sui, Tang, and Yuan dynasties that invaded the Korean Peninsula mentioned above are different ethnic states in China if you consider them centered on the Han people. It is also a country of different ethnic groups when viewed from the perspective of the Korean Peninsula.
In addition to small-scale direct invasions by foreign ethnic groups, the majority of the history of the Korean peninsula is that they invaded the peninsula after taking control of mainland China.
In this composition, Japan is classified as one of China's peripheral ethnic groups. Geographically speaking, Japan is called Toi in contrast to Northern Yi. They are a neighboring ethnic group common to China and the Korean Peninsula.
If we look at the annexation of Japan and Korea in the above sense, it means that the Korean peninsula was ruled by a different ethnic nation that also shared China. It is also a foreign country to China.
Some people point out the contradiction in that Koreans do not complain about the fact that they were ruled by China for over 1,000 years, but they hold a grudge against Japan for 1,000 years only for 35 years, but in reality, the country of China itself is the same. I wonder if there is a complicated background to the history of a controlled area.
Historically, Japan may still be recognized as a common enemy of China and the Korean Peninsula.
It is said that South Korea's sense of victimhood is something that has been cultivated historically, but if you look closer at the globe, you can see that mainland China has also had a history of being invaded. Based on this, Japan should resolutely clarify its position.
２００３ Shigeru Ishiba
Now, I have a question from the committee members: There has been a statement that Tokyo will be reduced to a sea of fire, that it will be reduced to ashes, and for that purpose, in order to accomplish that, in order to make it come true. If they started injecting fuel or did something like that, then their intentions would be clear. Tokyo to ashes," and then they just start pumping fuel, or they start making preparations, and they start taking action. Well, if you do that, wouldn't that be called a start?. That's true, because the intention is clear and that's what it is. Therefore, what I am saying is no different from what the Minister of Foreign Affairs is saying.
MEMO On February １６, ２０２２, Defense Minister Nobuo Kishi spoke at a subcommittee of the House of Representatives Budget Committee regarding the "capability to attack enemy bases" that the government is considering possessing. , stated that they would not rule out the option of bombing military bases, and acknowledged that it falls within the scope of self-defense.
As stated above, the government has already stated that the ability to attack enemy bases is within the scope of the right of self-defense. Regarding the next issue, ``retention'', there was a Cabinet decision in １９６９.
１９６９ Cabinet decision
Possessing so-called offensive weapons, whose performance is exclusively used for catastrophic destruction of the enemy country's homeland, immediately goes beyond the minimum necessary range for self-defense. Therefore, it is not allowed under any circumstances.
This is the current argument for ``possession'' of the ability to attack enemy bases. In other words, the debate is whether it is a minimal weapon for self-defense or whether it exceeds it.
Read it together
Technology and knowledge of the Korean Peninsula at that time from pictures of unicycles on the Korean Peninsula.
This photo is often introduced as an interesting ride on the Korean Peninsula, but how about comparing it to the second one in terms of efficiency and cost?The second one is a Japanese rickshaw, but neither is a modern vehicle.The difference is whether it is one wheel or two wheels.
At that time, there was no technology to make wheels on the Korean Peninsula, so it was imported from China.The wheels were expensive, and even though they were aristocrats on the Korean Peninsula, they moved on one wheel.As a result, the biggest difference is the number of people driving the car.In the case of one wheel, it becomes unstable when people ride on top of it and requires two people in front and back.In the case of two wheels, it can be operated by one person for stability.It can be imagined that human costs were much lower than wheels.Or there was no concept of labor costs.If you think about transportation efficiency, you can say everything about agricultural work and transportation of goods.If you need twice as many people to transport things, production efficiency cannot be increased.
It is said that nearly half of the people were slaves at the end of Joseon.If you just order the slaves, there will be no labor costs.
According to Jeong Dong-yu, a Confucian scholar in the Joseon period, "The Sheep, the Car, and the Needle" is not available in Joseon.During the Joseon Dynasty, there was no technology to bend and round wood to make wheels, and there were no horse-drawn carts, cattle carts, rickshaws, or agricultural water wheels.Will this be effective in farming?The absence of needles indicates that metal processing techniques are extremely low.Needles must be made with the technique of sharpening metal and must not be broken.Also, it is necessary to make a hole in the rear part where the thread can be machined.During the Joseon Dynasty, wheels and needles were obtained from China.
You can't make things without those tools.In order to make the tool, we need the tool to make it.Japan's industrial revolution was made possible based on craftsmanship handed down over 1,000 years.They made production facilities and railways that they learned from the West in imitation.
In winter, the Korean Peninsula is cold and warm, but when Japan came to Korea, it was bare and bare.As soon as it rained on the bare mountains, a lot of water flooded the fields and destroyed the crops.Japan planted forests on the mountains of the Korean Peninsula.The number has reached 1 billion in 10 years since 1911.This is a problem unrelated to the Industrial Revolution.This is because it is a matter of improving the efficiency and planning of human resources.During the Joseon Dynasty, no progress was made due to the servitude of the people, and technology and knowledge were lost.
Korea cries out that it was taken away by Japan due to the annexation of Japan and South Korea, but there was nothing on the Korean Peninsula when Japan went there.
Since the current government opinion has interpreted it as falling within the scope of the right of self-defense, it does not fall under "offensive weapons used only for catastrophic destruction" and can be interpreted as something that can be possessed. . Until now, the government's position has consistently been that possessing the ability to attack enemy bases is within the scope of the right of self-defense, but it has not actually possessed it and has kept it ambiguous . All that's happening now is an effort to actually own it . Possession of the ability to attack enemy bases has already been deemed constitutional, and the launch of an attack by the enemy has been defined, so it would be unreasonable to now say that we are opposed to actually having the ability to attack enemy bases. The premise of the argument seems to be different.
POINT The cabinet decision defines weapons as those used only for the catastrophic destruction of the enemy's homeland, so it is clear that this does not apply to weapons used within the scope of the right of self-defense.
I'm participating in the ranking.Please click and cheer for me.
Public opinion without examining Abenomics - there is no point in criticizing it based on contradictory premises.
There are some surveys and opinions in public opinion that Abenomics has ruined Japan, but is that true? First of all, what is Abenomics? Were you asking people who answered the same question as in the poll, or were you asking people you didn't know? I wonder if asking someone I don't know will give me the results I expected. First, let's review the three arrows of Abenomics.
Three arrows of Abenomics
Bold monetary policyFlexible fiscal policyGrowth strategy to stimulate private investment
Monetary policy is still ongoing, but former Prime Minister Abe has said that the consumption tax increase was decided in advance and was carried out at a time when it could not be postponed, so he was unable to fire a second arrow. In other words, Abenomics is actually the first arrow in a variety of environments. In other words, I would understand if there was an evaluation of the fact that it did not advance to the second stage, but I have doubts about evaluating Abenomics itself.
Next, I will list some of the achievements of Abenomics.
Main achievements of Abenomics
The total national and local tax revenue will reach a record high of 107 trillion yen in fiscal 2019, up from 78.7 trillion yen in fiscal 2012. The stock price, which was around 8,000 yen, rose to over 24,000 yen under the Abe administration. Public pension investment profits increased by 57.6 trillion yen in seven and a half years. The effective job opening ratio was 83 job openings for every 100 people in 2012, and 164 job openings for every 100 people in 2019. Business operators improved their treatment due to the labor shortage. The minimum hourly wage rose from 749 yen in 2012 to 901 yen in 2019. The rate of children from single-parent households going on to university increased significantly from 23.9% to 41.9%.
Sanaenomics (Japanese Economic Resilience Plan) will be published. Representative Sanae Takaichi announced a policy to carry on Abenomics during the last presidential election.
Sanaenomics three arrows
Financial easingFlexible fiscal stimulus in times of emergencyBold crisis management investment/growth investment
What they have in common is that monetary easing policy will continue, and if the Takauchi Cabinet is elected, the government will implement aggressive fiscal policy.
The fact that the Japanese government's balance sheet was introduced for the first time in 1995 means that the Japanese government did not have the concept of strategic investment, which companies take for granted. How can you invest without a balance sheet or cash flow statement? It was only a matter of being able to compare the income and expenditure for a single year, or the previous year. The term "primary balance" has come to be used like crazy. At that time, Japan believed that deregulation would revive the economy, and the government repeatedly took the approach of relaxing regulations through legal revisions.
As a result, the Japanese government was unable to rebuild the national economy or make strategic investments for economic growth after the collapse of the bubble, which was an unprecedented economic crisis. More than 30 years have passed since we stubbornly closed the doors. Then, companies moved their manufacturing sectors to emerging countries, and GDP and tax revenues mainly went to neighboring countries such as China, creating a dual wage structure of dispatched labor in order to prevent an increase in the number of unemployed people in Japan. . The economic disparity that arose from this process is said to be one of the causes of the current declining birthrate.
So, has Abenomics ruined Japan? Would that also mean denying Sanaenomics? Or will we continue to turn down investments from the government as we have been doing, paying close attention to the primary balance under the guidance of the Ministry of Finance and listening to the beautiful words of fiscal consolidation? The point of contention should be to gather opinions on whether or not bold fiscal spending by the government is necessary. In any case, regardless of whether the policy is better or not, there are parts where it seems like the point at issue is not policy at all, but just an extension of a personal attack, which is unfortunate.
Know the difference between the Rising Sun Flag and Hakenkreuz - What is the Korean historical perspective that equates them?
In the history of the world, I have never heard of a country changing its flag because it won or lost a war. Britain and France have been at war many times, but did Britain, which won the Anglo-French War, demand that the French flag be changed? On the contrary, there is no idea that such a thing would become a point of contention in post-war processing. South Korea persistently demands that Japan abolish the Rising Sun flag, just as Germany abolished the Hakenkreuz flag.
A national flag symbolizes the country. The disappearance of a national flag means the disappearance of that nation. The Rising Sun Flag is the internationally registered flag of Japan's Maritime Self-Defense Force. Calling for the abolition of that flag is the same as calling for the abolition of the Maritime Self-Defense Force. Is South Korea claiming that it wants to go to war with Japan? If this is not the meaning, then the perception of what a ``flag'' is is too different internationally.
South Korea always equates the Rising Sun flag with the Hakenkreuz, and claims that since the Hakenkreuz, the symbol of Nazi Germany, has been abolished, the Rising Sun flag should also be abolished. Hakenkreuz is the party flag of the Nazi Party (National Socialist German Workers' Party), and there is a history of it being used as the national flag. There is no Nazi party now, so there is no Hakenkreuz. That's simply the story.
Unless Japan disappears, the Japanese flag will not disappear, and unless the Japan Maritime Self-Defense Force disappears, the Rising Sun flag will not disappear. In the first place, the Rising Sun Flag is a flag that has been passed down culturally, so it will not disappear even if it has nothing to do with the Self-Defense Forces. No country will abolish its flag at the request of another country.
There is only one country in the world calling for the abolition of the Rising Sun Flag. That country is not at war with Japan.
Japan is the only country of color to successfully modernize (industrial revolution).
Japan is said to be the only country among people of color that succeeded in modernizing through the industrial revolution. So why was only Japan able to succeed?
Japan has been isolated from the rest of the world for over 200 years, and we are generally taught in school that modernization began with the opening of the country. What exactly is the industrial revolution? The industrial revolution can be thought of as a power revolution.
Watt in England improves the steam period and creates a machine that converts the power of steam into rotary motion. This was a revolutionary invention at the time. He will be able to transmit rotational motion to various gears and realize complex movements in various locations. So, what was the machine like up until then? It was similar to how humans and cows rotate their shafts, or when they step on a loom with their feet to obtain rotational motion.
This is the power of steam, and if you keep the fire burning, you can get an output many times greater than human power. What this achieves is mass production of products.
Until then, it was called a cottage craft industry, and as the name suggests, people made things by hand, but from now on, we will enter an era in which machines will be making large quantities of the same items.
This is the industrial revolution. Products manufactured in large quantities are cheaper and become popular among various classes. Steam locomotives also provided the infrastructure for transporting these large amounts of goods. From this era, the demand for coal to generate overwhelming thermal power increased explosively.
So, why did Japan succeed in the industrial revolution? Japan already had the technology to make these machines by watching and copying. During the Edo period, techniques were honed and improved as a traditional craft during the apprenticeship system, and the sword culture continued for a long time, making iron processing technology one of the best in the world. has in the metal processing field. Unlike human power, steam engines produce overwhelming power, so wooden machines would easily break. In other words, even the smallest parts of various machines must be made of metal and assembled. When Japanese people saw Western industrial machinery, they may have simply thought, ``Oh, I think I could make something like this.''
One reason is that Japanese people are good with their hands, but clocks were the most precise gear-based machines of the time. It is said that Japanese clocks were already created in Japan during the era of Tokugawa Ieyasu. Currently, Japanese clocks have a reputation for being the most accurate and unbreakable in the world, but these technologies were not invented yesterday.
■English subtitles
There is another thing that Japan achieved that was necessary for the industrial revolution. It is a departure from the feudal system. In the West, a civil revolution had already taken place, and the industrial revolution began more than 100 years later. Free citizens were already active during the Industrial Revolution, and their lives were not tied to feudal lords or land as in the feudal system.
In other words, when wealthy people at the time started a company that mass-produced products using industrial machinery, they could recruit and hire employees.
This is the proletariat, and a mobile labor force is essential to the industrial revolution. The Meiji Restoration was truly a revolution that destroyed the feudal Edo shogunate system and created a civil society.
The Japanese at the time were able to accomplish something that had never been seen before in the world: they simultaneously carried out an industrial revolution. Then, if you think about why other countries of colored people were unable to modernize, it can be said that it is because these two points were not met. One is metal processing technology. The other is the formation of a civil society, which means breaking away from feudal society.
In the first place, Southeast Asian countries and other countries of color were all colonized by the West from the latter half of the 15th century, so it is difficult to imagine that the countries under colonial rule would be able to achieve the industrial revolution that first occurred in the West in the late 18th century. It's impossible to say so. For example, what if we look at the neighboring countries of China and the Korean Peninsula?
China also has a sword culture, and has a long history of using iron tools. However, they were unable to break away from feudalism. As for the Korean peninsula, Korea did not have the technology to make needles and wheels, so they imported them from China. What this means is that the needle meant that people didn't have fine metalworking skills, and the wheel meant that people didn't know how to bend wood into rings, so they didn't know how to move things. It was carried on the back of a person, carried by a person, or placed on their head. In other words, it is impossible to improve the efficiency of infrastructure, and in the first place it is impossible to make the gears in industrial machinery or perform detailed metal processing.
What was fatal on the Korean peninsula was that the class system was exactly as it was before the Middle Ages, and it was a distorted society with 40% slaves, so talk of a mobile labor force was a thing of the future. . In order to firmly protect this old Korean society, the aristocratic class, the yangban, completely eliminated various reforms for modernization. It can be said that both were fatally lacking.
Only 27 years after the Meiji Restoration, Japan defeated the Qing Dynasty, which was considered a major power, and 10 years later defeated Russia. After World War I, Japan sat at the table at the center of the world as a permanent member of the League of Nations in 1919. This was only 51 years after the Meiji Restoration. In this way, Japan was the only people of color to achieve modernization, and the idea was to spread this wave to Asia.
Sun Yat-sen's Xinhai Revolution was made possible with Japan's support, and Sun Yat-sen, who founded the Republic of China, believed that Japan's Meiji Restoration was the cause of the Chinese Revolution, and that the Chinese Revolution was actually the result of the Restoration. I'm making a statement. During his exile in Japan, Sun Yat-sen took the name Sun Yat-sen and was a person who learned about Japan's modernization. There was a man named Kim Ok-gyun on the Korean peninsula, but the revolution in Korea ended in failure, and Kim defected to Japan. However, when he went to Shanghai, he was assassinated by an assassin sent from Korea. It is ironic that just four months after Kim Ok-gyun's death, the Sino-Japanese War began, resulting in the independence of the Korean peninsula and the beginning of reforms toward modernization.
As a result, China started the Xinhai Revolution in 1912, 44 years after the Meiji Restoration, and the annexation of Japan and Korea began 42 years after the 1910 Meiji Restoration. In fact, as Asian countries eventually achieved independence after the war, the process of modernization was necessary in any case, but it is worth noting that Japan was the only country of color to achieve this. However, it is clear that the modernization of Asia was derived from Japan's Meiji Restoration, and in this regard, China, the Korean Peninsula, and Japan, without exception, have recognized this important process within the theme of mod
[Masochistic view of history] Postwar Japan, which became an invading country, and the Western view of history | Recover Japan's view of history
Recently, there has been public criticism of Japan's GHQ view of history. There used to be an expression called the Tokyo Trial Historical View, but it was not widely used due to the strong left-wing tendencies in the Japanese media and educational institutions. The historical view of the Tokyo Trials is essentially a counterargument against the international label of an aggressor country as stipulated by a unilateral international military tribunal, but the current movement is not only based on the unfairness of the Tokyo Trials, but also in recent years, A major reason may be that records related to the Pacific War, whose period of classified information has expired, have been made public, and various things have come to light. The GHQ historical perspective is a perspective that covers various aspects of Japan's education, systems, and laws during the subsequent trusteeship era, including the Tokyo Trials.
There is a uniquely American compositional feature here. The United States was probably the first country to value the concept of a just war to this extent. Even today, the United States uses the word "justice" a lot when fighting or supporting wars. In other words, this value system started the postwar era with the premise that America was just and Japan was unjust. Can there be a concept of justice in war? War is not about good or bad; rather, the two countries have become unable to come to terms with justice. Otherwise, a war will break out when there is a fatal collapse, so there is no point in trying to say justice at this stage. Let's say the war ends and one of the countries wins. If we do so, will we be able to reach a compromise between the two countries? There are only victorious countries and defeated countries, so there is no point in calling it justice. But Japan received that education.
Japanese people are learning the history of Western values, not just modern history, but world history in general, but this is rarely questioned. In the first place, when you think about what Europe really is, Motomoto is a land where indigenous people called Celts lived, and Jews and Romans are also indigenous peoples. Today's Britain, Germany, France, and various other European countries are lands that were conquered and assimilated by Germanic peoples. The Germanic peoples were an ethnic group that lived in what is now Central Asia, and came under pressure from the expansion of the Huns and occupied Europe. The Anglo-Saxons, Franks, and many other modern European countries are countries of these Germanic tribes.
Broadly speaking, as an indigenous people, the Jews had already lost their country to the Roman Empire, and the Roman Empire was destroyed by the Germanic peoples. Slavic peoples are said to be indigenous peoples, and later Eastern European countries centered on Russia corresponded to them.
In other words, Germanic peoples invaded Europe from Central Asia, and for some reason this is described as the Great Migration of Germanic Peoples. It just means you moved. As a result, the Celts lost almost all of their territory, and now Ireland and Scotland are inhabited by Celts. Halloween is a Celtic festival that is famous for its harvest festival.
■English subtitles
Have you ever heard of the Age of Exploration? This started in the mid-16th century when the European maritime nations set out on ships and swept the world, and when we think of the Age of Discovery, we dream about it. However, from the perspective of us people of color, this would be the beginning of a colonial era that would last hundreds of years. Or for Africans, it has become an era of dark slave trade. The discovery of the American continent is said to be a spectacular discovery during this age of discovery. Didn't you learn the story of Columbus' egg in school? It is because he was a man with such a great change of thinking that it is as if he came to discover the American continent. Nowadays, various ideas are uploaded on Youtube every day, such as scattering salt on a table and making an egg stand up, which is not even a magic trick. The discovery of the Americas marked the beginning of an era of genocide for the indigenous Indians, and it is said that by the end of the 19th century, approximately 90% of the indigenous people had disappeared. It is estimated that there were once approximately 100 million indigenous people.
But now there is America, the land of freedom, which is the leader of the world. Not only did most of the Indians disappear, but blacks were imported from Africa as slaves, and it seems that we still have issues with racial discrimination, but America is a free country where many ethnic groups live. We will not neglect promoting our country as a democratic country that banishes ethnic discrimination from the world.
In fact, it is true that they have a lot of knowledge through research on various ethnic groups and cultures and the history of coexisting with many ethnic groups in the United States, and they want to eliminate discrimination. Although it is true that they are highly conscious, they used to do pretty dangerous things according to their wishes and desires, and even though they reflect on their cruel history, they suddenly claim to be messengers of justice. However, there is.
It is desirable that the Japanese people begin to become aware of the GHQ historical perspective, that the momentum for constitutional revision increases, and that Japan moves toward an autonomous nation, but in the first place, this European expansion policy and world division policy are important. From a broader perspective, Japan was the only Asian country that resisted hundreds of years of global colonial policy.
However, if we say that Japan's war was also a just war, it would be the same as America's, so we need to consider that it was a war that was fought in conjunction with Japan's national interests. However, at that time in the West, there was no sense that racial discrimination was wrong, and people of color thought it was okay to enslave or kill people. It can be said that they were considerably more advanced than them. In fact, Japan has already advocated the elimination of racial discrimination to the international community, and this is clearly stated in the Greater East Asia Joint Declaration. This becomes clear when we compare the management reality of Western colonial policies with Japan's annexation and colonial policies. This may be history that Westerners would never want to acknowledge.
If you look at it from the perspective of the GHQ view of history or the Western view of history, it becomes surprisingly easy to understand, but what makes Japan so complicated is that on top of this, it is naturally eroded by communist, Chinese, and peninsular views of history. After the war, the Japan Teachers Union was dominated by communists, who taught as educators, and left-wingers talked about the Chinese and Peninsular views of history, as if there was any need to listen to the fictional history they claimed. The media has been pouring it out to the people. There is still no sign that the comfort women issue will be resolved.
The problem is that Japan has abandoned its own historical perspective, and as a result has become a country that sways from side to side, wondering whether the past was just as it is told. The Japanese people need to regain their historical perspective. However, this is strictly an academic approach to history, and Japan is different from neighboring countries, which aim to turn history into a political and diplomatic issue rather than an academic approach.
In fact, the history of the West and the history of Japan are clearly different, and from Japan's perspective, the West is the aggressor. , Japan's closest neighbors are Western countries. How many democracies are there in Asia? There is no answer to these questions if we consider the past in terms of values of good and evil, but we should focus on the justice that can be shared by liberal countries in the present.
Regarding the current invasion of Ukraine by Russia and the war between Israel and Hamas, there are doubts about the tone of the discussion that excessively develops arguments about right and wrong. Since the war has already started, there is no point at all. In the history of the world, there is no example of a war ending based on the theory of good and evil.
As a TV show, it would be easier for viewers to understand and get excited if the show was broken down into an easy-to-understand picture of good and evil. We empathize with wars between other countries and want to believe that we are on the right side. However, during a war, information is also cut off, making it difficult to assess what is actually true.
Economic sanctions were imposed on Russia, and there was initially talk that the Russian economy would soon collapse, but what happened? The Russian economy's main industry is the export of natural resources, and its customers are EU countries, so if it continues to import oil and natural gas, its main industries will remain protected. For example, if an industry, such as industrial products, competes to be at the cutting edge of global technological competition, if it suffers from economic sanctions and suffers from financial difficulties, goes bankrupt, and is no longer able to manufacture products, even 10 years may pass. If you try to enter again, you won't be able to catch up. This may be the case with Japan's semiconductor industry. But natural resources are not like that; they do not degrade, recede, or diminish. Whether you dig in 10 years or now, you will be able to extract the same quality natural resources. In other words, Russia's main industries will not disappear. Furthermore, the area of Ukraine currently occupied by Russia is said to be 7.2% of Ukraine's territory. And when reporting on economic sanctions against Russia, there is absolutely no mention of Russia's profits from this vast occupied territory.
What would happen if the war ended with the country still under occupation? This region will still be Russia in 100 or 200 years. So will economic sanctions still be in place 100 years from now? In other words, the occupation policy ultimately has economic benefits when considered over a 100-year span. There is a person who is currently a member of the Diet who once said that it would be a good idea to give Takeshima to South Korea, but he doesn't seem to understand the meaning at all. If one fish is landed in South Korea in those nearby waters, Japan will lose the amount equivalent to that one fish. This is a loss that occurs every day, but how much profit will it provide over 100 or 200 years based on the amount of fish caught?
Whether you look at Ukraine or Takeshima, there is actually no justice at all, and the only way to protect territory is through military force. Is it possible to get these things back through diplomacy? Japan only has a track record of not being able to do so.
In this way, the idea that wars and conflicts can be ended by developing a theory of good and evil is nothing more than a delusion, and the idea that war can be avoided in any case through diplomacy is also a delusion. Since war occurs after diplomacy fails, the very idea of resolving it through diplomacy is bankrupt.
In other words, it is the responsibility of a normal country to strengthen both its diplomacy and military. In the case of Japan, we always develop an either/or argument. The choice is diplomatic or military. It would be nice to do both, but that kind of thinking won't become mainstream. Diplomacy no longer works in the military phase, and when diplomatic relations are working, it is no longer in the military phase. It is mainly the opposition forces in Japan who are forcing us to choose one or the other. The Japanese government only needs to do diplomacy, and has simply asked the United States to take on the responsibility of protecting the country.Takeshima and the Northern Territories, which the United States did not protect, were taken and are within the scope of the Japan-U.S. Security Treaty. We are barely maintaining the Senkaku Islands with words alone.
This is a country where candidates who say they should give up defending the country with their own strength are elected to the Diet. Isn't it strange?
Yasuhiro Nakasone called the Japanese archipelago an unsinkable aircraft carrier - Japan's topography gave the US military an advantage.
Former Prime Minister Yasuhiro Nakasone referred to former President Ronald Reagan as an "unsinkable aircraft carrier." This is a metaphor for the strategic significance of Japan's topography and the presence of U.S. forces within the Cold War structure. Japan once fought a fierce war with the United States, but after the war it became a democratic nation. Conflict between the United States and the Soviet Union had already begun during World War II. It is said that the United States participated in the war in part to secure its voice within the framework of the postwar world. Both the Korean War and the Vietnam War occurred amid conflicts between the United States and the Soviet Union. The United States did not want Soviet power to reach the southern tip of the Korean peninsula. It is said that an agreement on the 38th parallel was reached as a secret agreement at the Yalta Conference. In this context, Japan became a base for the US military to defend East Asia.
Japan is actually a neighboring country to the United States in the sense that there are no countries separating them geographically. It takes about 3 hours to get to Guam by air. The Japanese archipelago has a unique topography, stretching from north to south, bordering Russia to the north, Kyushu to the Korean Peninsula, China, and the islands south of Okinawa to Taiwan. For the United States, the terrain that covered the Japanese continent was attractive for the defense of Asia, and this was completely consistent with Japan's understanding of national defense. Conversely, it may be said that if the US-Soviet Cold War had not occurred, Japan-US relations would not have been able to recover to this extent. After the collapse of the Soviet Union, China rose to prominence and Asia's defense lines moved significantly south. As expected, the Japanese archipelago occupies an important position in this band as well. Currently, they are working together within the framework of Quad. Japan also plays an important role in the Taiwan Strait issue, and in this way, the Japan-US relationship has developed amid changes in the environment surrounding Asia.
There was a Korean leftist presidential candidate who said that the Korean peninsula was divided by the occupation forces (GHQ), but in essence, South Korea is a country born within the Cold War structure. There was no way to stop the Cold War structure, neither in Japan nor, of course, in South Korea. I can't believe my ears when I hear statements that deny this very upbringing. In fact, if South Korea had not come under GHQ's trusteeship, it would have simply been unified with North Korea. A democratic country forms the basis of South Korea's national ideology, and even if we lament the separation from North Korea, which has a completely different social system, nothing will be achieved by blaming others. . What can we independently do for the world? That always seems to be missing.
Technology and knowledge of the Korean Peninsula at that time from pictures of unicycles on the Korean Peninsula.
This photo is often introduced as an interesting ride on the Korean Peninsula, but how about comparing it to the second one in terms of efficiency and cost?The second one is a Japanese rickshaw, but neither is a modern vehicle.The difference is whether it is one wheel or two wheels.
At that time, there was no technology to make wheels on the Korean Peninsula, so it was imported from China.The wheels were expensive, and even though they were aristocrats on the Korean Peninsula, they moved on one wheel.As a result, the biggest difference is the number of people driving the car.In the case of one wheel, it becomes unstable when people ride on top of it and requires two people in front and back.In the case of two wheels, it can be operated by one person for stability.It can be imagined that human costs were much lower than wheels.Or there was no concept of labor costs.If you think about transportation efficiency, you can say everything about agricultural work and transportation of goods.If you need twice as many people to transport things, production efficiency cannot be increased.
It is said that nearly half of the people were slaves at the end of Joseon.If you just order the slaves, there will be no labor costs.
According to Jeong Dong-yu, a Confucian scholar in the Joseon period, "The Sheep, the Car, and the Needle" is not available in Joseon.During the Joseon Dynasty, there was no technology to bend and round wood to make wheels, and there were no horse-drawn carts, cattle carts, rickshaws, or agricultural water wheels.Will this be effective in farming?The absence of needles indicates that metal processing techniques are extremely low.Needles must be made with the technique of sharpening metal and must not be broken.Also, it is necessary to make a hole in the rear part where the thread can be machined.During the Joseon Dynasty, wheels and needles were obtained from China.
You can't make things without those tools.In order to make the tool, we need the tool to make it.Japan's industrial revolution was made possible based on craftsmanship handed down over 1,000 years.They made production facilities and railways that they learned from the West in imitation.
In winter, the Korean Peninsula is cold and warm, but when Japan came to Korea, it was bare and bare.As soon as it rained on the bare mountains, a lot of water flooded the fields and destroyed the crops.Japan planted forests on the mountains of the Korean Peninsula.The number has reached 1 billion in 10 years since 1911.This is a problem unrelated to the Industrial Revolution.This is because it is a matter of improving the efficiency and planning of human resources.During the Joseon Dynasty, no progress was made due to the servitude of the people, and technology and knowledge were lost.
Korea cries out that it was taken away by Japan due to the annexation of Japan and South Korea, but there was nothing on the Korean Peninsula when Japan went there.