Yomiuri finds Honda’s secret motives on comfort women issue
Posted by Matt Dioguardi on April 4th, 2007
The Yomiuri has been doing a series on the comfort women. They are defending Abe’s view, at least it’s seems that way. There have been three articles:
1. Comfort station originated in govt-regulated ‘civilian prostitution’
2. No hard evidence of coercion in recruitment of comfort women
3. Kono’s statement on ‘comfort women’ created misunderstanding
Here’s a quote from the second one:
The government has admitted the Imperial Japanese Army’s involvement in brothels, saying that “the then Japanese military was, directly or indirectly, involved in the establishment and management of the comfort stations and the transfer of comfort women.” The “involvement” refers to giving the green light to opening a brothel, building facilities, setting regulations regarding brothels, such as fees and opening hours, and conducting inspections by army doctors. However, the government has denied that the Japanese military forcibly recruited women. On March 18, 1997, a Cabinet Secretariat official said in the Diet, “There is no evidence in public documents that clearly shows there were any forcible actions [in recruiting comfort women].” No further evidence that could disprove this statement has been found.
Now compare this with a quote from Yoshiaki Yoshimi, author of Comfort Women.
The fact is, if you can’t use anything except official documents, history itself is impossible to elucidate.
This is from an recent New York Times article by Norimitsu Onishi:
In Japan, a Historian Stands by Proof of Wartime Sex Slavery
The third Yomiuri article states the following:
… observers have pointed out, and The Yomiuri Shimbun reported on the morning edition of March 16, that there are certain factors regarding Honda’s electoral district–such an increase in the number of residents of Chinese or South Korean origins, while the number of Japanese-origin residents has decreased–that may be behind why the Japanese-American lawmaker of California is leading such an initiative.
Are the esteemed editors for real?
Links:
Experts to counter atrocity deniers
Kono: Denying the ‘comfort women’ issue is ‘intellectually insincere
Who Loves Japan More?
Honda’s approach does more to enhance country’s status than Abe’s does
April 5th, 2007 at 4:34 am
All politics is local. This was obvious from the day he introduced the legislation…so what?
What I want to know is how would Representative Honda’s political motives have any effect whatsoever on the veracity of the witness testimony?
April 5th, 2007 at 3:48 pm
“What I want to know is how would Representative Honda’s political motives have any effect whatsoever on the veracity of the witness testimony?”
Sure. The explicit bias in who is allowed to testify.
April 5th, 2007 at 6:16 pm
Ah! Matt got it…allowing them to testify somehow casts a doubt on whether or not they’re telling the truth…hmm…a new low in jurisprudence (I take it you’re being sarcastic Matt).
April 5th, 2007 at 6:40 pm
I realized that there may be some who don’t recognize Matt’s sarcasm and might take that line of reasoning seriously, so I think it might be worth debunking it, since it would be pretty easy to do should anyone bring that line of argument up in a conversation:
1) Without context, claiming that the opposition to the comfort women is somehow biased against is disingenuous at best, and dangerous at worst. Anyone who watches the news knows that the Japanese government is fully able to use the media at any time they wish, and that they have little trouble publicizing their opinions. The women who have testified, on the other hand, have had no chance to tell their story in the court of public opinion. Despite testifying at the hearings, the sway of power is still very much against them, since their chance to tell their side of the story is bound to be subsumed under continuing noise from the other side. The relationship was never one of equity.
2) The argument confuses ‘bias’ with ‘veracity.’ It may be true that in the US House only one side of the story is being told. This is what we might call bias. It does not, however, mean that the testimony given is necessarily any more or less true. This is a simple logical fallacy that pundits often employ (on both the right and left) to spin an issue. It’s simply a distraction from what’s at hand, and is born of an easily-employed set of tactics that are meant to discredit witnesses and their testimony.
3) Of course the other side hasn’t testified in the hearings on this resolution! Why would they? It’s best for them to be as little involved as possible and let the whole issue blow over. Had Mr Seko and Mr Abe kept their mouths shut, we would be four weeks away from the resolution failing to come to a vote on the floor of the house. Instead, they have been forced into the uncomfortable position of being its greatest supporters, by giving people who would not have even noticed the issue something to rally against.
April 6th, 2007 at 9:22 pm
Whereas Abe, Aso and their LDP cronies have a virtually 100% Japanese voter base… but this is not taken into account, right?
Also, just as an observation, the Yomiuri tends to take the “it is widely known…” approach every time historians deem that a point in history is unfavourable to the pro-Japanese position.
I would not ask for non-Japanese sources for “proof” of Hiroshima - that would be a disgrace to the memory of those who perished in that terrible event. Yet, to have very selective memories of the suffering inflicted by the events of the past is near crimminal.
English textbooks are not free of the Hiroshima story, but history textbooks are watered down to suit the nationists. The result - millions of young Japanese under the impression that their country was the victim throughout history but is constantly hounded to appologise for losing a war.
Ah, the joy of being able to change history to suit yourself, and without needing a time machine…
April 7th, 2007 at 5:16 am
To Ken:
Thank you for providing arguments as to why the Yomiuri’s comment is off.
To Andrew:
Thanks for this statement, “Whereas Abe, Aso and their LDP cronies have a virtually 100% Japanese voter base… but this is not taken into account, right?”
That seems to hit the nail on the head. There are certain arguments that seem to do nothing but poison the well from which we all need to drink.