Because by WWII, Japan had become again a military dictatorship with a divine Emperor at its head. I doubt the leaders of the Mejii Restoration saw this as an improvement over the Shogun, and while some privilege now extended to the average person with the creation of a bureaucracy, by the 30's Japan was back again bent on conquest, their martial tendencies renewed, this time with modern armaments. You should have extended your study of Japanese history into the time leading up to the bombing of Pearl Harbor.
Perhaps if you had spent more time on the meaning and purpose of the Greater East Asia Co-prosperity Sphere you might have discovered it resembled the Shogunate only now with 'lesser races' as the oppressed and ruled and guided by their masters.
The Japanese of the war period were obedient to the leaders, the leaders immersed in Bushido for whom surrender was for cowards. The end of the war showed this as the divine emperor issued the edict, the people obeyed.
The Germans made an effort to depose Hitler to reach a peace, the Japs had no similar effort against the Emperor except at the end, and that effort was focused on continuing the war.
None of this addresses the question however, why was the killing of civilians acceptable, as long as atomic bombs weren't the method? Three of the battles referenced have been so poorly researched (Leyte, Iwo Jima, Okinawa (especially the naval battle)) that there appears to be an unspoken agenda of depicting a country with 2 million military in the field and 3000 operational aircraft readying for a fight on its home court as already on their knees crawling to the surrender table. It isn't an accurate portrayal of the state of the Empire of the Rising Sun in the summer of 1945.
“their martial tendencies renewed”
So your thesis is that Meiji was the anomaly and that they preferred a dictatorship, or that the dictatorship was an anomaly. a) is the Sonderweg btw.
“You should have extended your study of Japanese history into the time leading up to the bombing of Pearl Harbor.”
Who says I didn’t? You?
“you might have discovered it resembled the Shogunate only now with ‘lesser races’ as the oppressed and ruled and guided by their masters.”
It may surprise you but the Japanese didn’t regard themselves as the source of divine governance during the Shogunate. Just the opposite. Nor did they regard themselves as surrounded by lesser races.
“The Germans made an effort to depose Hitler to reach a peace, the Japs had no similar effort”
Oh, so that’s your thesis - that the Japanese had no soul and that all of them marched lockstep into the war?
“None of this addresses the question however, why was the killing of civilians acceptable, as long as atomic bombs weren’t the method?”
Again, I’m not opposed to the use of the atomic bomb. I’m opposed to the ahistorical nonsense that the bomb was ok because there were no other viable options. Eisenhower (and he should know!) argues otherwise.
“It isn’t an accurate portrayal”
Kamikaze is the resort of a nation already defeated.