FANDOM


(Created page with "Lastly, here's a question to consider. Is it considered cherry picking if high level leadership in an organization holds such opinions? Shouldn't the face of the company be se...")
 
 
Line 5: Line 5:
 
Moral relativism is not a proper response to arguments I presented above. America's sins are America's sins. Japan's sins are Japan's sins. America commiting wrong does not somehow explain away Japan's own problems or make what the Japanese doing right, which is what these people are doing. 
 
Moral relativism is not a proper response to arguments I presented above. America's sins are America's sins. Japan's sins are Japan's sins. America commiting wrong does not somehow explain away Japan's own problems or make what the Japanese doing right, which is what these people are doing. 
   
Lastly, you and I know about Japanese American internment camps, or the fact that allied war crimes exist, or that many historians consider the Tokyo fire bombings, for instance, to be one of the most devastating air raids in existence. Nowhere else on the planet exists such a large body of works criticizing America's own ignoble past, and guess what? Most of these historians are ''American'', first and foremost. Thanks to ''America'', you know about these things. While we don't make things easy to find, they exist if you care to look for them. We didn't go out of our way to destroy military records like the IJA or the IJN did
+
Which is also what you're doing, and I'm afraid I simply disagree
  +
  +
You and I know about Japanese American internment camps, or the fact that allied war crimes exist, or that many historians consider the Tokyo fire bombings, for instance, to be one of the most devastating air raids in existence. Nowhere else on the planet exists such a large body of works criticizing America's own ignoble past, and guess what? Most of these historians are ''American'', first and foremost. Thanks to ''America'', you know about these things. While we don't make things easy to find, they exist if you care to look for them. We didn't go out of our way to destroy military records like the IJA or the IJN did.
  +
  +
Who's doing the right thing here? You tell me. 
   
 
If Japan had the same diversity of opinions and the same level of vibrance in terms of allowing for discourse of different perspectives, you and I won't be having this conversation today. The fact that significant portions of Japanese scholarship deny any forms of wrongdoing and that they ''aren't'' fringe elements within the scholarly works should give anyone pause. 
 
If Japan had the same diversity of opinions and the same level of vibrance in terms of allowing for discourse of different perspectives, you and I won't be having this conversation today. The fact that significant portions of Japanese scholarship deny any forms of wrongdoing and that they ''aren't'' fringe elements within the scholarly works should give anyone pause. 

Latest revision as of 18:28, April 17, 2015

Lastly, here's a question to consider. Is it considered cherry picking if high level leadership in an organization holds such opinions? Shouldn't the face of the company be self-explanatory - i.e. speaking on behalf​ of the organization? Is it considered cherry picking when such positions are supported and endorsed by official works? Is it considered cherry picking when the prime minister of Japan himself holds these opinions?

Who's doing the cherry picking here, you or me? 

Moral relativism is not a proper response to arguments I presented above. America's sins are America's sins. Japan's sins are Japan's sins. America commiting wrong does not somehow explain away Japan's own problems or make what the Japanese doing right, which is what these people are doing. 

Which is also what you're doing, and I'm afraid I simply disagree. 

You and I know about Japanese American internment camps, or the fact that allied war crimes exist, or that many historians consider the Tokyo fire bombings, for instance, to be one of the most devastating air raids in existence. Nowhere else on the planet exists such a large body of works criticizing America's own ignoble past, and guess what? Most of these historians are American, first and foremost. Thanks to America, you know about these things. While we don't make things easy to find, they exist if you care to look for them. We didn't go out of our way to destroy military records like the IJA or the IJN did.

Who's doing the right thing here? You tell me. 

If Japan had the same diversity of opinions and the same level of vibrance in terms of allowing for discourse of different perspectives, you and I won't be having this conversation today. The fact that significant portions of Japanese scholarship deny any forms of wrongdoing and that they aren't fringe elements within the scholarly works should give anyone pause. 

I'm not writing these posts for you, since you and I clearly agree to disagree. I'm writing these for people who are aware that another side might exist, and to give people a glimpse of things that goes on across the oceans. In my opinion, adding in allies is counterproductive to their own positions and goals, and I don't think they're going to make enough money from it all else considered. 

As I've said earlier myself. My problem isn't that many derived KanColle works is anti-war. Rather, the message they're sending isn't that "we shouldn't fight a war because war is horrible," but rather: "we shouldn't fight a war we couldn't win." 

Community content is available under CC-BY-SA unless otherwise noted.