Just goes to prove there are jerks where ever you go.
Speaking of sepuku, I could never understand how slitting your gut, rather than fighting the enemy to the end, was somehow honorable. Looks to me that was the cluck-cluck end for a chicken. Consider, the patriots at the Alamo didnt disembowel themselves.
I agree with you 100%. Either surrender or go down fighting. The suicide thing doesn't make sense. In the Samurai tradition, the Samurai understood that they might have to die in battle, so they tried to prepare themselves for that sacrifice. That much makes sense. Twisting that into the willingness to commit suicide does not, however.
I don't believe suicide is justifiable, but here's some background. Sometimes the suicide thing was like the captain going down with his ship. He had failed, and took his life after the failure.
What is presented to us Westerners is probably conditioned by an incident in the late 1800’s in which a group of Japanese soldiers massacred French sailors who had hopped ashore at a closed Japanese village. The French government blustered about it, and some timid Japanese bureaucrats decided to execute a number of the soldiers in order to appease the French. The execution was to take place in front of of a French representatives, and the men being executed had voluntarily taken responsibility for the massacre. The Japanese soldiers were former peasants and asked if they could commit suicide, like samurai, rather than be executed. Their request was granted by their superiors. The French were intimidated by the show, and their main guy vomited. Anti-foreign resentment was running high among the onlookers, and the French made a run for their ships after a few of the men had killed themselves. Most of the men waiting to commit suicide never had to go through with it, and were granted a reprieve. These men were considered heroes who had stood up to foreign belligerents. This incident suggested to the Japanese that foreigners could be intimidated by an intense commitment to race and country that would lead Japanese to die rather than submit to foreigners. At the end of the day, however, in WWII it was the Germans who fought to the last house, whereas the Japanese surrendered prior to an invasion, so the suicide thing should be taken with a grain of salt.
If someone here has lived the Zen satori life-style of Dr. Suzuki ( a WWII contemporary) or can explain the warrior culture of the bushido (Both Suzuki and Bushido, logically considered, are completely incompatible), that would help.
If you're interested, I would recommend reading the Ha-gakure “Behind the leaves” or the Book of Five Rings, by Miyamoto Musashi. Japan has had an impressive military tradition at times, but not everything in that tradition was healthy or smart. You get some fanatics in the mix, and some reactionaries who have an idealized vision of life in a military dictatorship..
First of all, yours are really interesting posts. The Best of Free Republic, if you asked me. Much appreciated.
Now, this particular comment caught my eye, because it's contrary to most perspectives, and while true is, well, not quite true... or at least not the whole story.
In all of their battles against Americans, the Japanese suffered far more casualties than did Germans fighting Americans. The reason is, even at the end of the war, Japanese refused to surrender, whereas Germans, once they knew they were beaten, were almost happy to surrender -- especially to Americans & Brits.
Yes, Germans did fight "to the last house," but only against the Soviets, whom with excellent reason, they hugely feared. Against Americans, in the end whole divisions walked over with their hands up. And almost none would ever admit to knowing anything about Nazis -- Nazis? What's a Nazi?
By contrast, in the end, the Japanese only surrendered when so ordered by their emperor, who to this day is highly revered throughout Japan.
Which brings us, round about, back to the interesting question of these seemingly kabuki-dance protest demonstrations. Now, I'm no psychologist, or sociologist, but are we possibly here looking at some kind of ritualized, ceremonialized cultural reenactment each time, of Japan's final surrender, ordered by the emperor?
I've mentioned here before, my late Dad was part of the American Army which "invaded" Japan after the surrender. He used to say the Japanese treated them very well, but were not happy with units that came later, after original combat outfits rotated back to the States.
Makes me wonder if, in the Japanese mind, each new American unit was not just another cog in the Big Green Machine, but was actually a new invader, who had to be resisted, until forced by their own government to give up the fight?
Just a thought...