Should Japan abandon the "16-rays rising sun flag" ?

[grapefruit]

Blaming is on the Japanese imperial forces>
what does it mean?
I dont blam on the Japanese imperial forces.

Really? Then, you wouldn't consider yourself as an "ultra-super-right-wing" person, would you? I'm still shocked...

If you did not agree with the claim that the blame is on the Japanese Imperial forces, I suppose there would be no point for discussion in this thread. What do you think? If I did not agree with the claim, I would not want to abolish the flag. I got the impression that we at least agreed on this

So, is it true that you take the stance that Japan does not bear any responsibility for the war crimes? A few ways to avoid the responsibility came to mind.

One way is to deny the claim, saying, "No atrocities took place." Some might even say it is all propaganda from China and Korea.

Another way to deny the responsibility is to say war always leads to atrocities, since the term atrocity is subjective. This is true, but we are not talking about whether or not it was inevitable. Japan did engage in war against China. So, I suppose somebody from Japan was responsible.

So, what is your stance on the issue?

Why would one like to carry a stigmatized flag?
flag is Just flag like a name.
we cant not change even a stigmatized name for someone

First of all, personal names and flags are different. Indeed, the SDF can change the flag legally if it wants to. No one says it is illegal. Besides, even names can be rejected if they are inappropriate. Do you remember the "悪魔君" case? (http://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E6%82%AA%E9%AD%94%E3%81%A1%E3%82%83%E3%82%93%E5%9 1%BD%E5%90%8D%E9%A8%92%E5%8B%95)

If it is a stigmatized flag, we should make it a proud one

This comment kind of suggests that you agree with that the blame is on the Japanese Imperial forces... So, I assume you admit some degree of responsibility on Japan's part and I will continue our discussion....

Here is my reply to the quoted part: it would take 100 years or more to take out the stigma. Probably, it is impossible to achieve such a goal. Think about all those negative connoted racial words, "n***er", "三国人", "Jap", etc... In theory, you could change the image, but people don't usually do that.

Buraku is dirty, korean is dirty and criminal is dirty....
they have a dirty image for someone
this image leads discrimination..

I believe the discrimination against a certain grope of people mainly causes the term for the group to pick up negative connotations. The process of the word's negative image driving discrimination is most likely to be secondary. I believe "eta" was the original stigmatized term but
the government, back then, created the non-stigmatized term. Ever since, the term has been widely used. In the process, it picked up the negative image once again, because some Japanese still discriminate against them (I heard it is particularly the case on the western side of Japan).

Also, it does not make sense to link people's reaction to the flag to discriminating words in language. The way the flag is negatively viewed has little relationship with discrimination.

it is called a principle of impurity..

I'm not familiar with that principle... Could you tell me what it is?

[caster51]

Then, do you consider yourself an "ultra-super-right-wing" person? I'm still shocked...

It was Just WAR.
of couese, there is a responsibility for them that Japan was lost...

Besides, even names can be rejected if they are inappropriate. Do you remember the "悪魔君" case?

悪魔君　has nothing to do with that?
what relation does akumakun have with flag? family name cant change
that flag is not akumakun for the Japanese.

"n***er", "三国人", "Jap", etc... In theory, you could change the image, but people don't usually do that.

I dont know n**er? ask americam
sangokujin ,Do you know what does it mean?
Jap, i dont care at all.

because some Japanese still discriminate against them

Being discriminated becomes money.
they insist it themselves because of money..

it does not make sense to link people's reaction to the flag to discriminating words in language. The way the flag is negatively viewed has little relationship with discrimination

past negative viewed as your dirty image makes discrimination in your mind.
i dont want to see it . I hate it.....
indeed Nazi's flag makes you image of racist and discrimination ,right?

So, is it true that you take the stance that Japan does not bear any responsibility for the war crimes? A few ways to avoid the responsibility came to mind.

my stance is as same as ..
http://www.geocities.co.jp/Milano-Aoyama/6915/

[grapefruit]

It was Just WAR.
of couese, there is a responsibility for them that Japan was lost...

OK. I got your view.

Being discriminated becomes money.
they insist it themselves because of money..

I wouldn't say such an awful thing to someone who has experienced discrimination. Perhaps, you have never experienced discrimination of any sort.

[caster51]

I wouldn't say such an awful thing to someone who has experienced discrimination. Perhaps, you have never experienced discrimination of any sort.

I imagin there are full of discrimination by dirty image in your background.
poor man.

[pipokun]

Grapefruit, how do you explain the following history.

1. The flag already exited in 1954 before the following peace treaties with Japan and China/Korea which ended the war and war-related reparation.
2. South Korea and Japan normalized the relations in 1965. So did it with China in 1972.
3. Mysteriously some Korean/Chinese are always pretending, I think, that Japan would have not done anything to their country after the war.

[grapefruit]

Grapefruit, how do you explain the following history.
1. The flag already exited in 1954 before the following peace treaties with Japan and China/Korea which ended the war and war-related reparation.

First, let me ensure what you meant by your first point. I gather you are pointing out the fact that China and Korea signed the peace treaties without objection to the flag Japan had already started to use by then. Is this what you meant?

To begin with, I don't understand why the peace treaties have something to do with it. We are talking about whether or not Japan should voluntarily stop using the flag, right? The Korean or Chinese government is not demanding the Japanese government to abolish the flag. So, legality has no significance. Any Japanese person can voice their opinion on the US government's possession of nuclear weapons, despite the fact that Japan signed with the US the peace treaty which contained no objection to the atomic bombs dropped in Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Japan did not object to the treaty, but surely people in Japan can voice their objection to the US's use of nuclear weapons.

2. South Korea and Japan normalized the relations in 1965. So did it with China in 1972.

I think the answer to Point 1 explained why these facts have little bearing to abolishing the flag.

3. Mysteriously some Korean/Chinese are always pretending, I think, that Japan would have not done anything to their country after the war.

Are you saying that some Koreans and Chinese always express the idea that Japan did not contribute to the development their countries after the end of WWII? Did you bring up this topic, because you feel personally upset by this? Grow up. There are going to be always people like that. Insisting on the flag and upsetting the entire Chinese and Korean peoples as a retaliation would be an unwise, dangerous behavior. What can we gain by reacting to narrow minded people? If Japan were to start to fall into this childish psychology of "because he did it first, I should be allowed to do it in return", isn't it the same as becoming what you called "some Korean/Chinese"?

[pipokun]

First, let me ensure what you meant by your first point. I gather you are pointing out the fact that China and Korea signed the peace treaties without objection to the flag Japan had already started to use by then. Is this what you meant?
To begin with, I don't understand why the peace treaties have something to do with it. We are talking about whether or not Japan should voluntarily stop using the flag, right? The Korean or Chinese government is not demanding the Japanese government to abolish the flag. So, legality has no significance.

It is simply because the foreign relations are based on the bilateral treaties, the treaties bind each government and the flag is not a personal one, but the official one.

You are right that the Korean/Chinese has not demanded the abolishment and all parties did not see it as an obstacle to build relations of perpetual peace and friendship between the two, so both parties reached agreements.

Joint Communique of the Government of Japan and the Government of the People's Republic of China
September 29, 1972
6. The Government of Japan and the Government of the People's Republic of China agree to establish relations of perpetual peace and friendship between the two countries on the basis of the principles of mutual respect for sovereignty and territorial integrity, mutual non-aggression, non-interference in each other's internal affairs, equality and mutual benefit and peaceful co-existence.
http://www.mofa.go.jp/region/asia-pa...a/joint72.html

Let me show you a good example in this forum.
Just search a poster named Lexico here, and you will find lots of his great posts. I still highly rate his English skill as well as debating skill, but unfortunately he's gone after the Korean government disclosed its secret diplomatic documents to the public that Japan did much to his country when the both parties normalized the relations in 1965.

I just wished to see how he would reconstruct his argument after he knew the post-war fact...

I heard a lot of opinions sounding good so many times, "we forgive, but never forget", "future-oriented", and etc. It does not matter if you are "no forgive, no forget" or a history binding person and, of course, you have right to express your opinion, but I don't wrap it as "upsetting the entire Chinese and Korean peoples". The people in charge of the treaties also constituted a part of the entire Chinese/Koreans, didn't they?

Don't worry I don't think two wrongs make a right at all, but the world may be slightly better if all countries follow what Japan did and did not in the post-war period. I simply think it sounds a bit unfair if you don't take some post-war history into account.

We are talking about whether or not Japan should voluntarily stop using the flag, right?

You did not give me the answer why the great volunteer spirit you may call is applied only to Japan. I am waiting for it.