Comments on: History Is Written by the Victors

By: Japanese Education Minister: Don’t Respect Human Rights Too Much | Doubting to shuō: Chinese, Investing, EFL and Being a Geek in Taiwan

Tue, 27 Feb 2007 05:09:22 +0000

[...] the recent textbook revisions in Taiwan, which focus on patriotism, and the disturbing number of parents who still hit or their children [...]

By: Kaminoge

Kaminoge — Fri, 23 Feb 2007 14:32:58 +0000

I suppose compared to the KMT, the Japanese occupation didn’t seem as bad to some of the older people (though my mother-in-law’s memories of that period are far from nostalgic). Brutality is brutality, and occupation is occupation, but the KMT introduced corruption and gangsterism into the mix.
One theory I have about the lack of outrage felt by many Taiwanese over the Japanese colonial era is that many of the Taiwanese who died at the hands of the Japanese during that time did so in a state of armed resistance (at least up until about 1915). Several thousand Japanese soldiers died during the pacification of Taiwan.
In comparison, the KMT during the White Terror period conducted a Stalinist-style campaign of arresting, torturing, imprisoning and executing selected opponets (real and imaginary). Occupation might be easier to accept knowing you fought the good fight, something the local population was never able to do against the KMT.
The cynic might also note that it was the aborigines who suffered the most from the efforts of the Japanese to establish control over Taiwan, and that not too many Han Chinese are going to get too worked up about that.
BTW, a good examination of the attitudes of Germans and Japanese towards their WWII pasts can be found in Ian Buruma’s “Wages of Guilt”.

By: Battlepanda

Battlepanda — Thu, 22 Feb 2007 07:25:32 +0000

That’s a damn shame. I understand that many older Taiwanese remember the Japanese colonial period with some affection (the trains ran on time etc. etc.), but occupation is occupation.

By: Prince Roy

Prince Roy — Wed, 21 Feb 2007 18:20:52 +0000

I came very close to writing about this very issue a couple of weeks ago. I’m glad you did, Mark. Battlepanda, the whole 日治 vs. 日據 debate was all over Taiwan’s Chinese-language media in late January, but received limited coverage in the English media here, unlike the statues and the Nanjing massacre and Sun Yat-sen.

Likewise, the pro-independence expat bloggers here have given the greens a free pass on 日治 vs. 日據. In fairness to them, these expat bloggers are usually quite honest about the true brutal nature of Japan’s colonial activities in Taiwan, while the Taiwanese behind this move seem content to turn a blind eye.

By: Mark

Mark — Wed, 21 Feb 2007 06:12:16 +0000

Well, I think it’s done for the same reason that the US has been so much quieter about Japanese war crimes than German ones. It’s a calculated decision, one made with more concern for political realities than for historical truth.

By: Battlepanda

Battlepanda — Tue, 20 Feb 2007 07:21:15 +0000

That’s really a shame. I had thought that the revisions mainly scrubbed the ridiculous deference to Chiang and Sun, which is well-deserved. I really don’t understand (greater friendliness with Japan not withstanding) why the Taiwanese would want to expunge the suffering of people of its own heritage (as well as in many cases, its own people) from history texts. Is it really the case that “the enemy of my enemy is my friend”?

By: Mark

Mark — Tue, 20 Feb 2007 01:41:09 +0000

Previous textbooks did include information about the Japanese army’s sex slaves. Ask your Taiwanese friends. It probably wouldn’t be too hard to dig up an old textbook; the 早餐店 guy near my place had one.

By: Holly

Holly — Mon, 19 Feb 2007 17:40:50 +0000

As to the sexual slavery, do you know if this is a new glossing over, or just a continuation of the poor job that has been done in the past of educating young people about these particular events?

You’re right about the poor timing of the rewrites, especially since the ladies who suffered sexual slavery under the Japanese are passing on at a fast pace these last few years. Yes, they were largely Chinese women and women from other Asian countries, but an estimated 2,000 or more were from Taiwan. These days there are only about 20 known surviving “comfort women” in Taiwan (all in their 80s), and ignoring their story does a major disservice to them. This is especially interesting since the Taiwanese government has an interest in recovering the money from the Japanese that Taiwan has paid out in the past for reparations to these women.

By: Mark

Mark — Mon, 19 Feb 2007 15:00:25 +0000

Germany’s war machine certainly did some terrible things, but for a single assault, the Nanjing Massacre is hard to compare with. Aside from the 250,000 civilians or so dead, one must consider the way in which it was done. Take a look through this Wikipedia article, particularly the sections on rape and murder. It includes various first-hand accounts, including letters written by foreigners living there at the time.

It was my understanding that Japan didn’t really start debating this issue until the 70’s, after re-establishing contact with China. I’ve seen excerpts from Japanese text books in the 80’s still calling it a massacre. I don’t know for sure about current textbooks. I do know that the most extreme right-wing book is used in less than 1% of Japanese high schools, and is rejected by teachers organizations, though.

In any case, to answer your question, Taiwanese textbooks used to call it a massacre. Now some call it an “incident” and others ignore it completely. I would assume that the word “massacre” is still used, though.

By: Darin

Darin — Mon, 19 Feb 2007 14:02:19 +0000

I don’t want to get into a big debate, but the Nanjin Massacre the most brutal massacre of the modern world? What about Germany’s war machine? Or perhaps Mao’s destruction of his own people? Or even the KMT when they came to Taiwan just to list the one’s relevant to Taiwan?
As for the naming debate between massacre and incident, Japan takes a lot of heat for saying incident but Japan is consistent about calling everything an incident; in Taiwan are other such events referred to as massacres or are the consistently called incidents?