18-Nov-18 World View -- Cuba to pull thousands of doctors out of Brazil after right-wing Jair Bolsonaro wins election

[Guest]

You implied that Imperial Japan was pro-communist and Pro-soviet and that Russel who was pro-Japanese for a time was such because he was pro-communist and supporting Japan was the communist thing to do. Such an interpretation is contrary to the historical record because the Japanese Militarists were very anti-communist.

I didn't come away with that idea at all. You have misinterpreted what he said.

Their influence first wrecked relations with Japan and then after we were in the war they implemented incompetent strategies. Their ideals are the direct precursors of the current crop of globalists who want to democratize both Russia and China.

Not true. America had long been pro-Chinese. The silent crowds at the 1932 Olympics in Los Angeles when the Japanese athletes entered the stadium was a reflection of American public opinion, which was deeply anti-Japanese after the 1931 incident.

[CH86]

You implied that Imperial Japan was pro-communist and Pro-soviet and that Russel who was pro-Japanese for a time was such because he was pro-communist and supporting Japan was the communist thing to do. Such an interpretation is contrary to the historical record because the Japanese Militarists were very anti-communist.

I didn't come away with that idea at all. You have misinterpreted what he said.

Their influence first wrecked relations with Japan and then after we were in the war they implemented incompetent strategies. Their ideals are the direct precursors of the current crop of globalists who want to democratize both Russia and China.

Not true. America had long been pro-Chinese. The silent crowds at the 1932 Olympics in Los Angeles when the Japanese athletes entered the stadium was a reflection of American public opinion, which was deeply anti-Japanese after the 1931 incident.

That's because many regarded Japan as destroying the project of trying to create a Christian Democrat China. Remember there were thousands if not tens of thousands of missionaries living in China at the time. They did not go away until they were expelled in the 1950s after the communist takeover. That entire situation itself was the byproduct of the "open door" policy toward east Asia which was based on globalist assumptions and somehow we've never really abandoned such policies (except maybe briefly between 1969 and 1992).

[Guest]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ihaB8AFOhZo

Bertrand Russell - Message To Future Generations

[jmm1184]

On a completely separate subject, did you ever get Japan's timeline
straightened for the period between the Battle of Sekigahara (1600)
and the Meiji Restoration (1868)?

Unfortunately not yet - my resources on that period are very limited as far as information that would be helpful in figuring out its timeline. Most information in English on that period has a lot to do with cultural analysis, and they usually treat the entire period as a whole rather than focusing on how things were transforming (if they do focus on change, its in a very general sense of "gradual change/decline"). While the period is very interesting to read about on its own merits, its very frustrating in terms of generational analysis - there are no obvious crisis wars between 1600 and 1863, with the exception of the 1637-1638 Shimabara rebellion.

However, I'm not giving up. Scholars will usual note in footnotes or passing comments about "peasant rebellions" that occurred throughout this period. I sincerely believe they hold the key to unraveling Japan's generational timeline, though it also means it will be very difficult, as it's quite possible that Japan contained different timelines during the Tokugawa era that converged in the Meiji Revolution. Moreover, my hunch is that to fully understand the Tokugawa Era's generational history, one must sort out the Sengoku/Warring States Era of 1477-1600 - and that will be quite a knot to untangle.

It should be noted that none of these rebellions ever challenged the stability of the Tokugawa era or spread through all of Japan, though this doesn't mean they weren't crisis wars.

There is one more event in the Tokugawa Era history/legend that holds some interest in understanding Japan's generational history. If you're not already familiar with it, the story of the 47 ronin could be interesting to study as to where it fits in the generational scheme of things - perhaps it hints at a crisis war, pre-crisis war tensions, or post-crisis war tensions.

[John]

> On a completely separate subject, did you ever get Japan's timeline
> straightened for the period between the Battle of Sekigahara (1600)
> and the Meiji Restoration (1868)?

> Unfortunately not yet - my resources on that period are very
> limited as far as information that would be helpful in figuring
> out its timeline. Most information in English on that period has a
> lot to do with cultural analysis, and they usually treat the
> entire period as a whole rather than focusing on how things were
> transforming (if they do focus on change, its in a very general
> sense of "gradual change/decline"). While the period is very
> interesting to read about on its own merits, its very frustrating
> in terms of generational analysis - there are no obvious crisis
> wars between 1600 and 1863, with the exception of the 1637-1638
> Shimabara rebellion.

> However, I'm not giving up. Scholars will usual note in footnotes
> or passing comments about "peasant rebellions" that occurred
> throughout this period. I sincerely believe they hold the key to
> unraveling Japan's generational timeline, though it also means it
> will be very difficult, as it's quite possible that Japan
> contained different timelines during the Tokugawa era that
> converged in the Meiji Revolution. Moreover, my hunch is that to
> fully understand the Tokugawa Era's generational history, one must
> sort out the Sengoku/Warring States Era of 1477-1600 - and that
> will be quite a knot to untangle.

> It should be noted that none of these rebellions ever challenged
> the stability of the Tokugawa era or spread through all of Japan,
> though this doesn't mean they weren't crisis wars.

> There is one more event in the Tokugawa Era history/legend that
> holds some interest in understanding Japan's generational
> history. If you're not already familiar with it, the story of the
> 47 ronin could be interesting to study as to where it fits in the
> generational scheme of things - perhaps it hints at a crisis war,
> pre-crisis war tensions, or post-crisis war tensions.

I read the following page about the 47 Ronin (April 1702):

https://www.samurai-archives.com/ronin.html

This absolutely reads like an Awakening climax.

This would indicate that the previous crisis war occurred around 1670,
which would be the right time, given that the crisis war before that
was the Battle of Sekigahara (1600).

The 47 Ronin Awakening climax would suggest that the next crisis war
occurs around 1730, and the one after that around 1795, leading to the
Meiji Restoration (1868).

[John]

> The 47 Ronin Awakening climax would suggest that the next crisis
> war occurs around 1730, and the one after that around 1795,
> leading to the Meiji Restoration (1868).

China's White Lotus Rebellion occurred from 1795-1804. The
Japanese would certainly have been aware that it was going
on, and there may have been some crossover.

[jmm1184]

I read the following page about the 47 Ronin (April 1702):

https://www.samurai-archives.com/ronin.html

This absolutely reads like an Awakening climax.

This would indicate that the previous crisis war occurred around 1670,
which would be the right time, given that the crisis war before that
was the Battle of Sekigahara (1600).

The 47 Ronin Awakening climax would suggest that the next crisis war
occurs around 1730, and the one after that around 1795, leading to the
Meiji Restoration (1868).

Interesting, what about the incident reads like an awakening climax?

China's White Lotus Rebellion occurred from 1795-1804. The
Japanese would certainly have been aware that it was going
on, and there may have been some crossover.

I actually hadn't thought about that - I figured due to Japan's isolationism that surrounding wars in China, Korea, or Manchuria wouldn't have had any bearing on Japan's generational timeline, but that is an intriguing possibility. China's history is another timeline I am slowly trying to untangle, so it may be that answers to Japan will also come out of China's history (and even vice versa).

I suppose that leads on a very old question - what is required to achieve regeneracy? There appear to be examples of nations for which the vast majority of people see and experience no violence (England 1857-1865, though that's a weak example because of the Sepoy mutiny, and Switzerland during WWII for example), yet unmistakably go through a crisis war that reshapes the national consensus and results in a first turning - how can this be explained?

[John]

> I read the following page about the 47 Ronin (April 1702):

> https://www.samurai-archives.com/ronin.html

> This absolutely reads like an Awakening climax.

> This would indicate that the previous crisis war occurred around
> 1670, which would be the right time, given that the crisis war
> before that was the Battle of Sekigahara (1600).

> The 47 Ronin Awakening climax would suggest that the next crisis
> war occurs around 1730, and the one after that around 1795,
> leading to the Meiji Restoration (1868).

> Interesting, what about the incident reads like an awakening
> climax?

> China's White Lotus Rebellion occurred from 1795-1804. The
> Japanese would certainly have been aware that it was going on, and
> there may have been some crossover.

> I actually hadn't thought about that - I figured due to Japan's
> isolationism that surrounding wars in China, Korea, or Manchuria
> wouldn't have had any bearing on Japan's generational timeline,
> but that is an intriguing possibility. China's history is another
> timeline I am slowly trying to untangle, so it may be that answers
> to Japan will also come out of China's history (and even vice
> versa).

> I suppose that leads on a very old question - what is required to
> achieve regeneracy? There appear to be examples of nations for
> which the vast majority of people see and experience no violence
> (England 1857-1865, though that's a weak example because of the
> Sepoy mutiny, and Switzerland during WWII for example), yet
> unmistakably go through a crisis war that reshapes the national
> consensus and results in a first turning - how can this be
> explained?

The story of the 47 ronin was purely a palace coup, and didn't involve
the general population in any way except for later political debates.

I would actually say that the 47 ronin story was a nothingburger, just
a random incident quickly forgotten. But that's the point -- it
wasn't quickly forgotten. Something that's well-remembered centuries
later is almost always going to be either a Crisis climax or an
Awakening climax. It isn't a Crisis climax, so it has to be an
Awakening climax. And it must have been an event that was deeply
relevant to the preceding crisis war.

I've been spending a lot of time these days studying China, Japan and
Korea in the 1800s, and the lack of obvious conflict in Japan between
1600 and 1868 continues to be puzzling. So I'm wondering if there's
some paradigm unique to Japan that has to be understood.

There's a current debate going on today in Japan about a proposed law
to bring in a few thousand low-skilled foreign workers to do farming,
nursing care and construction jobs that Japanese workers don't want to
do. This is an important problem in Japan because the aging
population does not have enough younger workers.

https://asia.nikkei.com/Spotlight/Japan ... gn-workers

https://www.cnn.com/2018/12/06/asia/jap ... index.html

This is being hotly debated in Japan, and one of the main reasons that
some people give for opposing it is that Japan has always been an
island shut off from the rest of the world, with its unique shared
customs and shared culture, and newcomers would not fit into that.

So let's assume that Japan had crisis wars in the 1600-1868 period
like every other country. How would those wars be different from
crisis wars in other countries?

Xenophobia and nationalism are often defined in terms of things like
race, skin color, appearance, language and religion, things that are
set at birth and cannot be easily changed. But these things are all
the same for Japanese. The only thing that separates Japanese would
be political beliefs, things that can be easily fudged or even
changed.

So that would eliminate things like genocide and ethnic cleansing as
motivations for crisis wars. What's left? Clashes over resources --
land, water, and so forth. And wars over those kinds of resources,
when genocide and ethnic cleansing are not involved, would not be
recognized by historians in the same way that other crisis wars are
recognized, and so reading histories of the Japan 1600-1868, it would
be impossible to identify crisis wars in the same way. In fact, how
would historians characterize such a war, if they couldn't say
something like "the French versus the Germans" or "the Protestants
versus the Catholics"? They'd have to use some other euphemisms.

In summary: There were crisis wars in Japan in 1600-1868, but we have
to look for them in different ways.

[FishbellykanakaDude]

...
In summary: There were crisis wars in Japan in 1600-1868, but we have
to look for them in different ways.

What was the population growth (positive OR negative) between 1600 and 1868 in Japan?

Crisis wars tend to be "genocidal" in nature, and that implies "hatred" (and fear and uncertainty).

What was "hated" during that period, and did the population grow as one would expect in a time of "peace"?

Was there an "underground" genocide, of some sort?

[John]

...
In summary: There were crisis wars in Japan in 1600-1868, but we have
to look for them in different ways.

What was the population growth (positive OR negative) between 1600 and 1868 in Japan?

Crisis wars tend to be "genocidal" in nature, and that implies "hatred" (and fear and uncertainty).

What was "hated" during that period, and did the population grow as one would expect in a time of "peace"?

Was there an "underground" genocide, of some sort?

You do the research. Tell me what you come up with.