On 7/8/2003 11:38 PM, Eric Takabayashi wrote:

> Scott Reynolds wrote:
> 
>>On 7/8/2003 10:43 PM, Eric Takabayashi wrote:
>>
>>>Scott Reynolds wrote:
>>>
>>>>On 7/8/2003 10:16 PM, Eric Takabayashi wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>Why is it not simple for a textbook to give a factual account of what happened in Asia at the
>>>>>hands of the Japanese? Why can they simply not acknowledge the existence of the comfort women or
>>>>>atrocities committed, even if say, they cannot find an acceptable figure?
>>>>
>>>>I thought that stuff was mentioned
>>>
>>>"Some" of that stuff if any.
>>
>>So in that case it's not being ignored.
> 
> There are textbooks now completely purged of references such as to the comfort women. And if people
> aren't being taught it and they don't know it, yes it is being ignored.

I agree with you that this is a disturbing trend, especially because the 
motivation in at least some cases seems to be quite openly political. I 
do not think, however, that the Japanese or world history textbooks are 
the appropriate place for detailed catalogs of Japanese wartime 
atrocities or extended discussions of their causes and ramifications.

I would like Japanese kids to have the opportunity to learn these things 
and discuss the issues they entail, but the history textbooks are not 
the place for it since they do not attempt to provide detailed analysis 
of any period in history.

>>How much would satisfy you? If the Japanese history textbook devotes,
>>say, six pages to WW2,
> 
> If schools are going to spend weeks on just the A Bombing or Battle of Okinawa, devoting entire school
> events or class study trips to them, it suggests that more material and time are needed for WWII
> history, period.

I don't thing they spend weeks on the A bombing or Battle of Okinawa in 
their standard history classes. Those sound like special classes, and 
they would be the place where an analysis of why the A bombing and 
Battle of Okinawa came to take place would be appropriate.

>>The fact is that such classes do not go into much detail about *any*
>>period of Japanese history. Why should they suddenly zero in on WW2 in
>>order to give the kids a politically motivated guilt trip?
> 
> I could ask the same about the politically motivated instilled victim mindset by focusing the bombing of
> Hiroshima, and why it is the focus of "peace" studies here, at the cost of perhaps every other
> historical event or issue.

Again, it is my impression that this is a separate issue from the 
standard history curriculum, which every kid who attends a school 
accredited by the education ministry is required to cover.

> Because WWII is so important to Japan's history, is why it should be studied more.

Yes, in a special class devoted to that subject, or possibly to WW2 and 
related issues as well.

> It is not a politically motivated guilt trip. It is merely the truth, just like when American kids are
> required to study slavery and American social problems, in much more than six pages. Perhaps they devote
> entire semesters to such study.

It is not a simple matter of "the truth." The selection of the facts to 
be presented (and those to be omitted), and the manner in which they are 
presented, will inevitably reflect the agenda of the compiler or of the 
teacher. This is inevitable, and we should recognize it as such. What 
you are demanding is a fundamental shift in the ideological orientation 
of the educational establishment in Hiroshima, in fact.

-- 
_______________________________________________________________
Scott Reynolds                                      sar@gol.com