Talk:Japanese militarism/Archive 1

Overlap

The overlap with these existing articles is large: Japanese nationalism, Empire of Japan. I think this page should be merged, mostly into the latter. Charles Matthews 14:07, 28 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Merging this article into either of the articles specified by the above user would make that article too long and too detailed.

--Deryck C., HK,CN

Totally accord with you,this present article,if another explain of Japanese Militarism question.at contrary if one complement to previously articles mentioned,no needed to merging this. in ones cases if needed explains how present article,in others cases,for more details,if reading the long articles.

this article if explain same alone.

--Reader72

Japanese militarism needs its own lemma. While of course Japanese militarists were strong nationalists, Japanese nationalism is a much broader field, including State shinto, Kokugaku, sonno joi, fukoku kyohei, Nihonjinron and lots of other topics. -- Mkill 15:52, 21 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

removed

I removed some words to make space for the library of congress text, I put it here for reference. I really can't believe this stuff has not been deleted yet. Just look at it. Is that supposed to be a neutral point of view??? How long has Nazi Germany been called a "good example" in this article??? -- Mkill 15:52, 21 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

18 September 1931, Japan began her attack on China, marked by the Manchurian Incident. After withdrawing from League of Nations in 1933, Japanese expansion in China continued.

A very remarkable event during militarist expansion in China would be the Nanjing Massacre, in which 300,000 Chinese people were killed by Japanese armies.

After World War II started in 1939, the Japanese felt a strong need for the military to control power. Therefore, militarism rose to its peak when General Hideki Tojo took power in 1940.

The Tokyo militarists took the Nazis as an "good example". I just recorder what THEY THOUGHT at that time. Maybe I should add a few words to clarify that./

Internal factors for Rise of Militarism

Bushido: Ways of the warrior. According to this Japanese philosophy, Bushido, Japan has strong military tradition and military always enjoyed special privileges.

Meiji Constitution: Set up in 1889, it granted the military right of direct access to the emperor. This encouraged the emperor to give his power to the military.

Weakness of Party Government: The Japanese party government, set up after World War I, has its own weaknesses that allow it to easily fall into corruption. To correct this, militarists rose in power.

Ultra-nationalist Ideas: In 1919, Kita Ikki advocated Showa Restoration in restoring real power to the emperor. The advocation also suggested that Japan championed all Asiatic people.

Discontent of Military: As of above, Japan accepted many inferior disarmament pacts in the 1920s. Military felt very dissatisfied as a result.

Threats from Leftist Movement: Communist and Socialist threats drove rich people's back support to the Militarists.

External Factors for Rise of Militarism

Great Depression: Japan suffered population explosion in the 1920s. When Great Depression broke out in 1929, Japanese felt the need for foreign ventures (invasions).

Unification of China: China reunified in 1928 under Jiang Jieshi. This alarmed that if Japan had to expand, they must act immediately, otherwise their expedition would be stopped by China.

Humiliation by Western Powers: As of above, not even Military, the general public felt dissatisfied about signing of all these peace treaties in the 1920s (see section above: Liberal Twenties). Therefore, they wanted no more peace but war.

Totalitarian examples in Europe: Fascism in Italy which rose in 1922, and Nazism in Germany which rose in 1934 set good examples for Japanese.

The Fading of the Genro

I think the current article overlooks what I would say is perhaps the biggest reason for the rise of the militarists, and that is the fading of the Genro. It was in fact the Genro, led by Okubo, who put down the adventuristic Seikanron in the 1870's. Having militarily overthrown the Shogunate, the Genro understood what a dangerous and double-edged sword militarism could be. The power of the Genro was able to keep the militarists in check until the 1920's. Finally, so many of the Genro had died that there was no longer any restraint on the militarists. The current article mentions Saionji as having appointed many of the early military prime ministers in Showa. But as the Wikipedia biography on Saionji himself shows, he was in fact a target of assassination in the 2-26 Incident. He was a force against the militarists until his death in 1940. All in all, the Genro were the dike holding back the wave of militarism. When they were gone, nothing was left to stop the militarists. --Westwind273 (talk) 06:10, 6 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Project Assessment

An excellent start, and largely unbiased. Still, for such a major and controversial topic, a more extensive discussion is I think necessary. The list of factors should be expanded out into a fuller discussion, and more attention needs be paid to the downfall of militarism at the end of the war and the strong anti-militaristic feelings of postwar Japan which continue to dominate today. Of course, pockets of pro-militarism groups in the postwar should be addressed as well, as they certainly fall under the umbrella of "Japanese militarism" and are relevant to the wider discussion. LordAmeth 21:37, 2 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Merge discussion

It has been proposed that Militarism-Socialism in Showa Japan and [[]] be merged into this article. Please express your opinion on this proposed merger below, also indicating whether Support or Oppose this proposed merger.

Opinions

Support. I think these three smaller articles would be much better as one larger and more cohesive article. ···日本穣^{? · Talk to Nihonjoe} 05:31, 3 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. Japanese militarism should be a stand-alone article, as it is a characteristic of Japan from the start of the Meiji period to the end of World War II. The brief article on Japanese expansionism can be merged into it, with the mostly non-relevant early Showa period chronology moved elsewhere. As its name indicates, Militarism-Socialism in Showa Japan is more specific to the Showa period, and can/should be merged with Japanese fascism. Not all militarists were supportive of right-socialism, and many militarists regarded Kita Ikki and his calls for a Showa Restoration to be treasonous. Thus, although both topics (militarism and "fascism/right-socialism") are related to each other, but I believe enough non-overlapping information exists to justify separate topics under pre-war Japanese nationalism, which is also in need of a lot of work. --MChew (talk) 14:41, 8 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think they are fairly distinct enough to leave separate. Statism in Showa, although very real and tangible, is also somewhat superficial. It was an apparent phenomenon. Japanese militarism is a much deeper phenomenon that drives to the heart of what was really going on. Both articles deserve their place. --Westwind273 (talk) 06:02, 6 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

An addition that I would like to add to the post-war section

It seems that Dowers perspective on post war militarism is lacking certain aspects, leaving his claim open to discussion. I found this one report that should shed some light in an unbaised manner which points out that while nationalism is on the rise, militarism is not: http://eastasianstudies.research.yale.edu/japanworld/rosenbluth.pdf

I'd like to add it in the future if possible.

OK. No responses. Please comment if your against the change. I'll be happy to discuss it.

Question of accurace regarding Independence of the Military

"In reality, while this tactic was used only one time (ironically to prevent a General, Kazushige Ugaki, from becoming Prime Minister in 1937), the threat always loomed high when the military made any demands on the civilian leadership."

I believe that this statement is misleading because the Saionji Cabinet fell in 1912 for this very reason.

I would like to remove this phrase but wanted to check here first.

See here for one example

Ph8l (talk) 13:48, 11 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]