Emperor Hirohito

It seems that the right decision was made to keep him; consider the industrial and peaceful country that Japan is today!
Quite possibly, but no matter who occupied the throne, they would still have been subservient to MacArthur and the US's wishes. The occupation of Japan didn't end until 1952, and US forces were there in strength for quite awhile in the region. That kept them in check for a long time. The Japanese Self-Defence Force was not able to defend itself from the Soviets or anyone else, so they stayed safe and sound under our nuclear umbrella while building themselves into the self-proclaimed WW2 1st A-Bomb victimized anti-nuclear peace loving economic giant and history deniers that they are today. Their emperor is a figurehead anyway, at least as defined by their post WW2 costitution. Godzilla could be on the throne for all that matters.

 

Portaghee joke:

"The three principles of the Japanese Constitution are: Hiroito, Hiropito and Hiroku."

Now don't ask me to translate this in public

 

Portaghee joke:

"The three principles of the Japanese Constitution are: Hiroito, Hiropito and Hiroku."

Now don't ask me to translate this in public
PM it to me please....

 

Portaghee joke:

"The three principles of the Japanese Constitution are: Hiroito, Hiropito and Hiroku."

Now don't ask me to translate this in public

Soveriegnty of the people, respect for individual rights, pacifism

 

That's it? I was expecting a little more than that. Oh well. It's a big change from their pre-WW2 modus operandi....

 

That's it? I was expecting a little more than that. Oh well. It's a big change from their pre-WW2 modus operandi....


I am sure that Za's version is much more colorful than mine and loosely translates to something like: "Don't nuke me, again, bro!"

 

I am sure that Za's version is much more colorful than mine and loosely translates to something like: "Don't nuke me, again, bro!"
Or "Dude, where's Hiroshima?"

 

PM it to me please....

I was thinking nobody was going to ask :icon-mrgreenbandit:

 

Think instead of what sort of a peacful, pastoral and EMPTY country it would be today if the Emperor HADN'T accepted Unconditional Surrender and the implicit diminution of his own status....to in turn be allowed to keep his throne by the grace of Douglas MacArthur

If the Japanese had fought to the death as in Okinawa...the Home Islands would be a great nature reserve today...

If that happened, think of the huge amounts of criminalization of the United States their would be, a lot of people like to look back at history with a hindsight bias which unfortunately doesn't always help. The US is already taking all the blame from the atomic bombs they dropped on Japan, imagine how much they would have taken if they dropped more? Not saying the Allies should take all or no responsibility, but no where near the amount they are if you look at the bigger picture.

Hirohito was used as a propaganda tool by the Allied nations after WWII, they kept him in power somewhat and used propaganda leading people to believe it was the fault of the military. How far this goes is very controversial and still debated of course.

Perhaps the Allies thought that through the Emperor they would have a better chance of rebuilding Japan than without? The military was being tried for war crimes so they were out of the equation, who else is left in the country that garners enough respect to hold his nation together? Perhaps one could consider the Emperor a "puppet" figure used by the American government to change Japan?

In other words, no military or Emperor would have made it a hell of a lot harder for a bunch of foreigners to "rule" over a group of people who for centuries valued things such as the Bushido code.

Edit: Also factor this in, when Emperor Hirohito was alive it was forbidden for anyone in Japan to talk about any war crimes committed by him/in his name. After his death people became vocal and violence ensued, does/did the same happen for Japanese speaking out against Americans? This is definietly something someone should look into, not everyone defending the Emperor after the death would be old enough to remember the war I assume.

Edit 2: Again factor in the increasing threat of the U.S.S.R., under Hirohito they could have rebuilt Japan faster and used it as a strategic locaton if things with the U.S.S.R. went south.

In my mind this is beginning to make a lot of sense, I hope it is for others as well.

 

Hirohito was used as a propaganda tool by the Allied nations after WWII, they kept him in power somewhat and used propaganda leading people to believe it was the fault of the military. How far this goes is very controversial and still debated of course.



I think it has pretty well been established that World War II was the fault of the military. Once they got into power, the lead Japan straight to war.

Perhaps the Allies thought that through the Emperor they would have a better chance of rebuilding Japan than without? The military was being tried for war crimes so they were out of the equation, who else is left in the country that garners enough respect to hold his nation together? Perhaps one could consider the Emperor a "puppet" figure used by the American government to change Japan?



I believe this to be the case.

 

I think it has pretty well been established that World War II was the fault of the military. Once they got into power, the lead Japan straight to war.

Yes but how much of that is fact and how much of that is the propaganda at work?

The military probably is to blame but to a certain extent, I doubt very many Japanese opposed what the military was offering in these "new lands".

 

Yes but how much of that is fact and how much of that is the propaganda at work?

The military probably is to blame but to a certain extent, I doubt very many Japanese opposed what the military was offering in these "new lands".

Yes. But wasn't the military responsible for the propaganda? The people certainly bought it lock, stock and barrel.

Bob

 

Yes. But wasn't the military responsible for the propaganda? The people certainly bought it lock, stock and barrel.

Bob

The propaganda that blamed the Japanese military for fooling the Emperor and people? That was the Allies who did that, I'm sure the Japanese military/government used propaganda to support their cause during the war but I doubt it would take much to convince people that a better life for the people of Japan existed outside.

Despite the Japanese people making the most of the land they lived on, they still had trouble coping which is one of the reasons why they went to war. Capturing more land meant they could grow more food, "move around", etc.

 

Oddly enough, until the Japanese came out of their isolationist mode with the Mejii Restoration, and their diving wholeheartedly into the "industrial revolution", they were fully self supporting in terms of foodstuffs. After that time, an increase in birth rates (live births) ensued which made them into a food importing nation by the mid 1920s when Hirohito came to the throne. With the land they had gained in the Russo-Japanese war there was a large portion of their food grains imported rather than home-grown. But the Korean grain didn't add enough to their expanding need, and it just got worse after WW1.

That aside, the whole issue of Hirohito is a tangled can of snakes, and difficult to judge from not only a "western mindset", but one done through the lens of hindsight. The Imperial Japanese Army and Navy had held veto power over the formation of cabinets since 1900,and it must be remembered that from the 1930s on, the military clique held and controlled almost all political power in Japan, and pursued policies that eventually led Japan to launch the second Sino-Japanese War as well as WW2. That said, primary sources, such as a General Sugiyama's memos and the diaries of both Kido and Konoe, describe in detail the "informal meetings" Hirohito had with his chiefs of staff and ministers.

These documents show that the Emperor was kept informed of most if not all main military operations and that he frequently questioned his senior staff, asking for (but not demanding) changes. This is a position which Herbert Bix, in his book Hirohito And The Making of Modern Japan, truly expands upon.

There were three ideas as to Japanese "responsibility" and as to what should be done with Hirohito post war. The first option was the one put forward by the former ambassador to Japan; Joseph Grew, as well as Hugh Burton, and Joseph Ballentine (the Asia scholars) in America proper. This idea was supported by Gen. MacArthur; i.e. retain the Emperor but make him subservient to the Supreme Commander Allied Powers (SCAP). That was to be MacArthur eventually, but when put forward not a known certainty.

The second was to abolish the Chrysanthemum throne completely, and form completely secular and politically democratic society. This was rejected as being too foreign to the Japanese culture to be enforced from without. If it occurred from inside, that was all well and good, but a totally new version of democracy has ever been successfully imposed on an unwilling civilization (to this day).

The third option was to force Hirohito to abdicate, be tried for his complicity in the war, and be replaced by one of his many brothers in a constitutional monarchy modeled on the British system. (see Japan Diary, W. Sloane p. 340)

This third option was seen as the least advantageous, and in the words of MacArthur himself, the Japanese would see this as:

"the greatest betrayal in their history, and hatreds and resentments engendered by this thought will unquestionably last for all measurable time. A vendetta for revenge will thereby be initiated whose cycle may well not be completed in centuries, if ever." (later writing that)… "and a condition of underground chaos and disorder amounting to guerrilla warfare in the mountains and outlying regions result."

MacArthur continues with this. "I believe all hope of introducing modern democratic methods would disappear, and that when military control finally ceased some form of intense regimentation probably along Communist lines would arise for the masses."

Only the first option seemed to offer the ability to peacefully occupy Japan, and halt the communist influence which might be "fermenting" in the background. The second option was unrealistic, and the third option would be akin to putting the spirtiual son of the goddess of Shintoism on trial. That was sure to cause internal unrest which may never be able to be contained. Even though Shintoism was removed from the "official religion" status, and government funding ceased, it wasn’t really banned.

USA then directed reforms which included the release of all political prisoners, the legalization of most political parties, including the Communist Party, and pro-union legislation (the Trade Union Law, passed December 1945). The Peace Preservation Law (1925) under which thousands of leftist critics of the government had been arrested, imprisoned or executed, was scrapped. The Special Higher Police force was abolished, and many of its former leaders put on trial. The vote was granted to women, and the US began a drive to break up the huge zaibatsu corporations and launched an agrarian reform act which would abolish the landlord class in the countryside. And the rising-sun battle-flag was prohibited. T

The US inspired constitution would abolish laws which discriminated against women, reform the criminal, and civil laws and decentralize the police and impose a provision which committed Japan to democracy, regular elections, and explicitly forbade Japan from resorting to warfare to solve international disputes.

And the US began to purge members of the old regime and elite, and would eventually prohibit 200,000 specific individuals from holding public office in the future. Some other men who did eventually hold office were an embarrassment, but they only came to office after the US had ended its occupation of Japan in 1952. The ordinary Japanese embraced the reforms, and in the Diet elections of April 1946, 95% of the candidates had never held office before, and 39 women were elected. The treaty that led to US withdrawal in 1952 confirmed the loss of all territories seized by Japan in the 20th century.

The US was to maintain bases in Japan, and Japan began being strongly aligned as a Cold War ally of America. In the final years of occupation America had shifted from reform to reconstruction. With this Japan had been substantially re-shaped, and in my opinion for the better.