• Coasting0942@reddthat.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    60
    ·
    8 months ago

    To be honest: I passively learned that Japanese commit Seppuku if they break their knightly code. The kamakazi pilots. And during WWII, they were non stop “I didn’t hear no bell” even after the first nuke.

    This biased me into thinking Japanese values life a tidbit less than others.

    But I’m pretty sure they just had a rampant conservative choo choo train with no brakes, no exits for the more sane Japanese.

    • pthaloblue@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      46
      ·
      8 months ago

      Watch some Japanese programming, read any magazine there, and you’ll probably notice a huge amount of articles praising people living long, active, healthy lives. Is suicide an issue? Absolutely. But it’s ridiculous to say they don’t value life, especially when compared to some countries which seem to have a problem with gun violence

      • Jojo@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        12
        ·
        8 months ago

        They also claim, like, so many of the “oldest people in the world”.

          • Norah - She/They@lemmy.blahaj.zone
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            6
            ·
            8 months ago

            While yes, most of the world’s oldest people generally don’t live in cities, what’s your beef with Tokyo specifically? You make it sound like a death city.

            • Johanno@feddit.de
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              edit-2
              8 months ago

              It’s just that over 90% (i think) 30% of Japans population lives there. So the claim that they have the oldest people in the world makes it funny when most of their population lives in a city that is probably not that healthy to live in.

              I mean Tokyo is probably the best Mega city on the planet so it ain’t that bad for sure.

              • Soulg@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                10
                ·
                8 months ago

                Ok but Google says that 10% of Japanese live in Tokyo, which is still massive but 90% is a ridiculous stretch

                • Riven@lemmy.dbzer0.com
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  4
                  ·
                  8 months ago

                  Maybe he’s referring to the greater Tokyo Metropolitan area? Sounds more plausible at least since it’s absolutely massive. Def not for just Tokyo city.

                  • Norah - She/They@lemmy.blahaj.zone
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    4
                    ·
                    8 months ago

                    The Greater Tokyo Metropolitan area has a population of 37 million while the country has a population of 125.7 million. While an impressively large percentage, it’s still less than a third (29.4%) of the population of Japan proper.

    • muggedTassi@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      23
      ·
      8 months ago

      To describe a tactic that exploited the Shintoist beliefs of soldiers of a fascist state as “conservative” is certainly one way to put it…

    • Honytawk@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      16
      ·
      8 months ago

      Pretty sure the ones dropping nukes on entire cities have even less value for life.

      • LordGimp@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        16
        ·
        edit-2
        8 months ago

        We literally nuked them to cow them into surrender rather than spend millions of American and japanese lives in a brutal and ultimately pointless land campaign. We took away their glorious last stand on the home islands and replaced it with instant annihilation, lingering death, and the taste of the sun. It might have spared more Japanese lives in the long run, but it definitely saved a whole mess of American lives in an immediate way. That’s what really matters. USA #1 baybeee

        • Liz@midwest.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          12
          ·
          8 months ago

          There’s strong arguments to be made that we nuked them so that they’d surrender to us instead of the Russians.

          • frezik@midwest.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            8 months ago

            The Russians had zero ability to invade the Japanese home islands. The Russian official declaration of war only cut off a potential way for the Japanese to broker a peace through a neutral Russia.

            • I Cast Fist@programming.dev
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              8 months ago

              I suspect they could’ve gained a limited (big emphasis on limited) ability to invade the Japanese islands if/once they seized coastal Chinese and Korean regions that were under Japanese control, some ships might’ve been around.

        • frezik@midwest.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          8
          ·
          8 months ago

          That’s a post facto justification. Reading over the notes of the people doing the strategic planning for it all, it’s quite clear they expected the war to continue. For example, there was a debate on if they should drop the nukes as they become available (which would have been a few a month), or if they should store them up and drop a whole lot on invasion day.

          The Japanese had already fought on through the firebombing of Tokyo. That killed a comparable number of people to the atomic bombings. It just takes a lot more bombers to make it happen compared to dropping a nuke.

          • LordGimp@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            8 months ago

            Honestly I feel like we really missed something when we passed on the bat bombs. Those things would have absolutely annihilated any significant concentrations of Japanese structures. I feel like weaponizing nature could be done a lot better

            • brbposting@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              5
              ·
              8 months ago

              In his letter, Adams stated that the bat was the “lowest form of animal life”, and that, until now, “reasons for its creation have remained unexplained”.


              In one incident, the Carlsbad Army Airfield Auxiliary Air Base … near Carlsbad, New Mexico, was set on fire on May 15, 1943, when armed bats were accidentally released.


              Bat bombs were an experimental World War II weapon developed by the United States. The bomb consisted of a bomb-shaped casing with over a thousand compartments, each containing a hibernating Mexican free-tailed bat with a small, timed incendiary bomb attached. Dropped from a bomber at dawn, the casings would deploy a parachute in mid-flight and open to release the bats, which would then disperse and roost in eaves and attics in a 20–40-mile radius (32–64 km). The incendiaries, which were set on timers, would then ignite and start fires in inaccessible places in the largely wood and paper constructions of the Japanese cities that were the weapon’s intended target.

              Thanks for this incredible bit of knowledge.

                • brbposting@sh.itjust.works
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  8 months ago

                  Initially, dogs were trained to leave a timer-detonated bomb and retreat, but this routine was replaced by an impact-detonation procedure which killed the dog in the process.

                  Oh great

          • Kusimulkku@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            8 months ago

            Just makes me think that the Japanese probably should’ve surrendered way earlier to save those lives

        • Gabu@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          8 months ago

          Complete bullshit and typical 'murican propaganda. Japan was already preparing to surrender.

          • frezik@midwest.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            8 months ago

            There was a coup in the Japanese military to try to prevent a surrender after the nukes were dropped. Things are far from that simple.

            Now, one thing I’ll agree with is that Japan would have surrendered long before on the condition that the Emperor would be kept in place. Then we got the unconditional surrender, and after all the peace talks were done and documents signed, we still allowed the Emperor to keep his place. The argument here is that the American people were out for blood and public perception would only accept unconditional surrender. I don’t think that’s a very good moral argument, though, especially when it led to nukes being used in anger.

          • LordGimp@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            8 months ago

            Lmfao yeah training women and children how to kill themselves rather than be raped to death by the Wildman invaders sounds a lot like preparing to peacefully surrender.

            Eat 15 dicks and then read a history book imbecile

      • Here in the states we have a long standing tradition of assassination of our elected officials.

        The US also has a long standing tradition of overkill in warfare. It has little to do with our lack of respect for life, rather the assumption enemies might not me keen to surrender or may believe in the cause for which they’re engaged in hostilities enough to put up an honest fight.

        Shaun on YouTube makes a pretty strong case the US didn’t need to drop atom bombs on Japan to secure its surrender, but the US has been really good about not resorting to nuclear attacks since then even when officials wanted to use them, as per Reagan and Trump. Human civilization continues to close on eighty years without a nuclear war.

        • frezik@midwest.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          8 months ago

          Everyone forgets the Korean war, but MacArthur begged for the use of nukes when he fucked up and gave the Chinese an excuse to get directly involved. This is especially notable because while the USSR had tested a nuke at that point, they didn’t have many, and they didn’t have the ability to deploy them en masse against the US directly. The US still had an effective monopoly on deploying nukes, and it still didn’t use them.

          Oh, and fuck MacArthur.

    • Rickety Thudds@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      8 months ago

      Who told you Japan was planning to continue the war after Hiroshima?

      They were planning to concede after the first bomb. The president didn’t even learn of Nagasaki until it was in the news.

    • Uriel238 [all pronouns]@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      edit-2
      8 months ago

      In traditional Nippon culture ritual suicide is the final act of protest one makes, say if ordered by superiors to commit an immoral act. In the twentieth century, this translated into a if you can’t take the heat… sentiment in the highly competitive corporation environments. Hence young adults had a high suicide rate when they couldn’t perform well enough in school to get salaried jobs.

      (My understanding of this is warching from the US and seeing the pressures on Japanese businesses to compete wit American ones. While companies on both side were rivalistic towards each other, they all influenced and were affected by the mutual economy, so recession for everybody!)

      In the aughts, Japan became aware of a population crisis. Young people were not having enough children to match geriatric mortality. Also young people were disengaged from the traditional values of their grandkid-starved elders: Much like the US, and, I expect, similarly aided by the new deliberation capacities of the internet, kids realized their elders didn’t care about the welfare of them or their kids, but their own legacies and, maybe, to play with the cute infant.

      Which brings us to this era, in which Japan is looking to move away from the hypercompetitive, pro-suicide culture that presumably drove productivity in the 20th century.

      As a note, the US typically outperformed Japan in productivity per capita, mostly because we are culturally less compliant and obedient to our authorities, hence our industrialists are quicker to replace labor forces with automation. The quicker US companies could downsize production teams and send out another batch of pink slips, the better.