|
On October 19 2012 07:36 LunaSea wrote:
I really dislike the fact that people that were born after the second world war now act like they were personally hurt.
I don't think that Japan's decisions are better though.
Well a lot of the people were born because of Japanese act of forcing people to have sex with each other.
How would you feel when your grandfather tells you the horror of these event to you at an early age? And then you are pretty much ingrained to inherit the same beliefs as them.
|
On October 19 2012 07:36 LunaSea wrote:
I really dislike the fact that people that were born after the second world war now act like they were personally hurt.
I don't think that Japan's decisions are better though.
well... the world works like that. How about n*gger?
nvm let's not derail the thread.
|
On October 19 2012 07:37 oneofthem wrote:
they turned to nationalism because it is politically useful. a functionalist analysis doesn't explain the ground level mechanisms of these sentiments. they are primitive in themselves, and activate in their particular form by circumstances. the circumstances do not themselves constitute a reason for the idea.
the obsession with industrialization is a faddish thing.
To appreciate the link between industrialization and nationalism, you first have to understand that tribalism sentiments do not, in and of themselves, constitute sufficient ground for people to abandon their regional and class identities - ie their 'lesser tribal' groups - for the sake of a 'greater nation.' Prior to industrialization, the vast majority of the world was stuck in relatively isolated rural communities. They had no enduring common cause with people a few villages over, and in any case had difficulty communicating with said people efficiently.
Industrialization uprooted people, blurred class lines, and introduced mass education and communication. Geographic and class mobility ensured the development of a new 'national' culture that cut across geographic and class lines. Mass communication sustained and expanded this culture. Sentiments changed in response. Thus, the old 'tribal groups' were broken down and reforged in the crucible of the nation-state.
|
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
On October 19 2012 07:50 Azarkon wrote:Show nested quote +On October 19 2012 07:37 oneofthem wrote:
they turned to nationalism because it is politically useful. a functionalist analysis doesn't explain the ground level mechanisms of these sentiments. they are primitive in themselves, and activate in their particular form by circumstances. the circumstances do not themselves constitute a reason for the idea.
the obsession with industrialization is a faddish thing. To appreciate the link between industrialization and nationalism, you first have to understand that tribalism sentiments do not, in and of themselves, constitute sufficient ground for people to abandon their regional and class identities - ie their 'lesser tribal' groups - for the sake of a 'greater nation.' Prior to industrialization, the vast majority of the world was stuck in relatively isolated rural communities. They had no enduring common cause with people a few villages over, and in any case had difficulty communicating with said people efficiently. Industrialization uprooted people, blurred class lines, and introduced mass education and communication. Geographic and class mobility ensured the development of a new 'national' culture that cut across geographic and class lines. Mass communication sustained and expanded this culture. Sentiments changed in response. Thus, the old 'tribal groups' were broken down and reforged in the crucible of the nation-state.
some of the conditions made possible by industrialization are certainly critical. population contact and mobility, mass communication and culture. but this is a euro centric analysis that does not fit well for non industrialized, national identities. you can extract some common factors that are present in the industrialization scenario and discard the particulars.
mass political movements give content to nationalist narratives, industrialization largely levels the localized bonds and give population concentration of relative strangers, and mass communication allows wide reach for collective identities. this is not simply industrialization, it's about mass politics and a new collective category that unites the participants. industrialization and the revolution made things possible for the french etc, but common history of imperialist oppression made things possible for serbs, palestinians, chinese etc. there is also the idea that nationalism is really good at mobilizing the masses for wars. something european states did fairly well.
it is easy to confuse a factor being necessary and it being the sufficient cause, particularly in a backward looking functional analysis. you need to explore more diverse analysis because the industrialization theory is pretty dated.
|
On October 19 2012 07:45 Northern_iight wrote:Show nested quote +On October 19 2012 07:36 LunaSea wrote:
I really dislike the fact that people that were born after the second world war now act like they were personally hurt.
I don't think that Japan's decisions are better though. well... the world works like that. How about n*gger? nvm let's not derail the thread.
such a power full argument you have there.
|
On October 19 2012 07:45 Northern_iight wrote:Show nested quote +On October 19 2012 07:36 LunaSea wrote:
I really dislike the fact that people that were born after the second world war now act like they were personally hurt.
I don't think that Japan's decisions are better though. well... the world works like that. How about n*gger? nvm let's not derail the thread.
here's a great application
![[image loading]](http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/2/2a/Notepad.png)
instead of typing your stuff into the TL post box first, find that icon, type your comments in it, then hit the del button. then type it again, hit the del button. if on your third try you still wanna copy paste from that window and hit "post", you might qualify for a Canadian welfare program
|
Hi, Shady Sands, can you tone down siding with the Chinese in the OP please? Sure, Kwark provided some perspective, but it really doesn't give anyone the right to destroy property or discriminate based on race, so take his post out, please.
I'm Japanese, Chinese and Korean, among other things, and I've lived in Japan and Korea, so I have some perspective on this issue as well. Saying that it's justified for China to put shit like that into their national stance is no different from saying it was okay for Japan to do it back in WWII.
Thanks for your understanding.
|
On October 19 2012 08:38 ZERG_RUSSIAN wrote:
I'm Japanese, Chinese and Korean, among other things, and I've lived in Japan and Korea, so I have some perspective on this issue as well.
But it says you are Russian.
mind = blown
|
On October 19 2012 08:49 kaisen wrote:Show nested quote +On October 19 2012 08:38 ZERG_RUSSIAN wrote:
I'm Japanese, Chinese and Korean, among other things, and I've lived in Japan and Korea, so I have some perspective on this issue as well. But it says you are Russian. mind = blown
I think I judge a lot of people on their ability to recognize that my name is a play on ZERG_RUSHIN
|
On October 19 2012 08:38 ZERG_RUSSIAN wrote:
Hi, Shady Sands, can you tone down siding with the Chinese in the OP please? Sure, Kwark provided some perspective, but it really doesn't give anyone the right to destroy property or discriminate based on race, so take his post out, please.
I'm Japanese, Chinese and Korean, among other things, and I've lived in Japan and Korea, so I have some perspective on this issue as well. Saying that it's justified for China to put shit like that into their national stance is no different from saying it was okay for Japan to do it back in WWII.
Thanks for your understanding.
Nobody in this thread sided with the rioters. Racism isn't even relevant here, it's nationalism. The quote is very relevant to the ton of people coming in and saying "wtf China is so crazy" without understanding the context.
The issue with these islands is different in nature than the Japanese expansionism of the past anyway. It just should have been given to Taiwan in the first place as it's closest to it.
|
On October 19 2012 10:40 RavenLoud wrote:Show nested quote +On October 19 2012 08:38 ZERG_RUSSIAN wrote:
Hi, Shady Sands, can you tone down siding with the Chinese in the OP please? Sure, Kwark provided some perspective, but it really doesn't give anyone the right to destroy property or discriminate based on race, so take his post out, please.
I'm Japanese, Chinese and Korean, among other things, and I've lived in Japan and Korea, so I have some perspective on this issue as well. Saying that it's justified for China to put shit like that into their national stance is no different from saying it was okay for Japan to do it back in WWII.
Thanks for your understanding. Nobody in this thread sided with the rioters. Racism isn't even relevant here, it's nationalism. The quote is very relevant to the ton of people coming in and saying "wtf China is so crazy" without understanding the context. The issue with these islands is different in nature than the Japanese expansionism of the past anyway. It just should have been given to Taiwan in the first place as it's closest to it.
Proximity is not a factor when it comes to territorial disputes. Taiwan being close to the islands is entirely irrelevant. On top of it, Ishigaki Islands of Japan is closer to Diaoyu/Senkaku Islands (or maybe depends on which one), which is also irrelevant.
|
On October 19 2012 10:40 RavenLoud wrote:Show nested quote +On October 19 2012 08:38 ZERG_RUSSIAN wrote:
Hi, Shady Sands, can you tone down siding with the Chinese in the OP please? Sure, Kwark provided some perspective, but it really doesn't give anyone the right to destroy property or discriminate based on race, so take his post out, please.
I'm Japanese, Chinese and Korean, among other things, and I've lived in Japan and Korea, so I have some perspective on this issue as well. Saying that it's justified for China to put shit like that into their national stance is no different from saying it was okay for Japan to do it back in WWII.
Thanks for your understanding. Nobody in this thread sided with the rioters. Racism isn't even relevant here, it's nationalism. The quote is very relevant to the ton of people coming in and saying "wtf China is so crazy" without understanding the context. The issue with these islands is different in nature than the Japanese expansionism of the past anyway. It just should have been given to Taiwan in the first place as it's closest to it.
Kwark clearly provided and subtly endorsed a rationale for the rioters. And however you want to frame it is fine with me, it's clearly bad however you label it. Also, "Alaska is closer to Canada than the US so clearly it should be Canada's" is not how territory works.
Still, please remove that post from the OP. It's disgusting to hear people bring shit that happened half a century ago up like it's part of anything the current generation should be punished for, or to hear shit along the lines of "Japan didn't feel bad at all for the murders and rapes and genocides" "they're totally being dicks about it" "look at how much better Germany handled how they used to be evil".
Come on.
|
On October 19 2012 11:26 Orek wrote:Show nested quote +On October 19 2012 10:40 RavenLoud wrote:On October 19 2012 08:38 ZERG_RUSSIAN wrote:
Hi, Shady Sands, can you tone down siding with the Chinese in the OP please? Sure, Kwark provided some perspective, but it really doesn't give anyone the right to destroy property or discriminate based on race, so take his post out, please.
I'm Japanese, Chinese and Korean, among other things, and I've lived in Japan and Korea, so I have some perspective on this issue as well. Saying that it's justified for China to put shit like that into their national stance is no different from saying it was okay for Japan to do it back in WWII.
Thanks for your understanding. Nobody in this thread sided with the rioters. Racism isn't even relevant here, it's nationalism. The quote is very relevant to the ton of people coming in and saying "wtf China is so crazy" without understanding the context. The issue with these islands is different in nature than the Japanese expansionism of the past anyway. It just should have been given to Taiwan in the first place as it's closest to it. Proximity is not a factor when it comes to territorial disputes. Taiwan being close to the islands is entirely irrelevant. On top of it, Ishigaki Islands of Japan is closer to Diaoyu/Senkaku Islands (or maybe depends on which one), which is also irrelevant.
For a de jure explanation of the Diaoyu/Senkaku Islands issue, look to this article in today's FP feed:
http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2012/10/18/those_islands_belong_to_taiwan
|
On October 19 2012 11:26 Orek wrote:Show nested quote +On October 19 2012 10:40 RavenLoud wrote:On October 19 2012 08:38 ZERG_RUSSIAN wrote:
Hi, Shady Sands, can you tone down siding with the Chinese in the OP please? Sure, Kwark provided some perspective, but it really doesn't give anyone the right to destroy property or discriminate based on race, so take his post out, please.
I'm Japanese, Chinese and Korean, among other things, and I've lived in Japan and Korea, so I have some perspective on this issue as well. Saying that it's justified for China to put shit like that into their national stance is no different from saying it was okay for Japan to do it back in WWII.
Thanks for your understanding. Nobody in this thread sided with the rioters. Racism isn't even relevant here, it's nationalism. The quote is very relevant to the ton of people coming in and saying "wtf China is so crazy" without understanding the context. The issue with these islands is different in nature than the Japanese expansionism of the past anyway. It just should have been given to Taiwan in the first place as it's closest to it. Proximity is not a factor when it comes to territorial disputes. Taiwan being close to the islands is entirely irrelevant. On top of it, Ishigaki Islands of Japan is closer to Diaoyu/Senkaku Islands (or maybe depends on which one), which is also irrelevant.
It is in this case, proximity isn't all of it. It's just historically part of Taiwan under Qing China, and it makes much more sense to give them to Taiwan but the US didn't for some reason.
|
On October 19 2012 12:14 ZERG_RUSSIAN wrote:Show nested quote +On October 19 2012 10:40 RavenLoud wrote:On October 19 2012 08:38 ZERG_RUSSIAN wrote:
Hi, Shady Sands, can you tone down siding with the Chinese in the OP please? Sure, Kwark provided some perspective, but it really doesn't give anyone the right to destroy property or discriminate based on race, so take his post out, please.
I'm Japanese, Chinese and Korean, among other things, and I've lived in Japan and Korea, so I have some perspective on this issue as well. Saying that it's justified for China to put shit like that into their national stance is no different from saying it was okay for Japan to do it back in WWII.
Thanks for your understanding. Nobody in this thread sided with the rioters. Racism isn't even relevant here, it's nationalism. The quote is very relevant to the ton of people coming in and saying "wtf China is so crazy" without understanding the context. The issue with these islands is different in nature than the Japanese expansionism of the past anyway. It just should have been given to Taiwan in the first place as it's closest to it. Kwark clearly provided and subtly endorsed a rationale for the rioters. And however you want to frame it is fine with me, it's clearly bad however you label it. Also, "Alaska is closer to Canada than the US so clearly it should be Canada's" is not how territory works. Still, please remove that post from the OP. It's disgusting to hear people bring shit that happened half a century ago up like it's part of anything the current generation should be punished for, or to hear shit along the lines of "Japan didn't feel bad at all for the murders and rapes and genocides" "they're totally being dicks about it" "look at how much better Germany handled how they used to be evil". Come on.
Comparing these islands to Alaska is just a blatant false equivalency. China did not take part in the treaty in 1972 when it was given to Japan.
The discussions that you find "disgusting" are unfortunately completely reasonable, and I don't see why we should not engage in them because some people gets offended, grow some thick skin dude.
|
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
the american treaty thing is not that legitimate. but the conflict should not escalate to the kind of intense racial hatred we see.
|
Theres not a single post here justifying the rioting and destruction of property. Kwark's post is simply providing context and a sense of perspective for the unaware.
|
Canada2068 Posts
I was browsing TL as usual until I saw this thread had been revived. Suffice it to say Christmas came early this year.
|
I am not able to understand it.
|
On October 19 2012 14:41 ShadeR wrote:
Theres not a single post here justifying the rioting and destruction of property. Kwark's post is simply providing context and a sense of perspective for the unaware.
Stop being a racist for a second and let's do analysis:
On September 16 2012 06:21 KwarK wrote:To be honest learning about Japanese conduct in world war two and the lack of a national self examining in the wake of the second world war kind of justifies anti-Japanese feelings. Imperial Japan was a diseased nation, akin to 1930s Germany, the difference is that Germany has swallowed its pride and learned to accept and learn from its past whereas Japan preferred self pity and denial. I don't require the Japanese descendants of the war criminals to atone any more than I would ask the German descendants of Nazis to atone. However accepting their shameful history and showing an awareness of the suffering their ancestors caused would help ease the tensions. Only a month ago two Japanese ministers visited a shrine honouring fourteen Class A war criminals. http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-08-15/shrine/4200304Violent protests are always wrong but anti-Japanese sentiment is not without its justifications.
Let's take a look at Kwark's post, shall we?
Sentence 1: "To be honest learning about Japanese conduct... justifies anti-Japanese feelings."
Sentence 2: Imperial Japan was evil but didn't atone correctly and wallowed in self pity and denial, they should have followed the example of the great Nazis. What the fuck.
Sentence 3: It's not the current generation's fault. Okay, that's obviously true.
Sentence 4: However they still need to take responsibility for what people did fucking YEARS BEFORE THEY WERE BORN.
Sentence 5: Some shit politicians did that shows how evil Japanese people are. By that metric, all Americans are idiots. Wait--
Sentence 6: A link to the evil deeds of the politicians.
Sentence 7: Violent protests are always wrong BUT anti-Japanese ones are justifiable.
I mean, I'm being reasonable here, but this is an attack on Japanese people in the middle of China turning all of their guns on them, too. Are you guys blind?
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
