It’s a lot of fun to rag on Japan for the multiple sins of omission present in its notorious textbooks; some web sites and chat rooms talk of little else aside from Japan’s revisions of history. So it’s refreshing to see an article that looks at how this same practice is applied in China and, most interestingly, Hong Kong.
The doctoring of Japanese school textbooks to omit negative portrayals of its wartime conduct has provoked an outcry in East Asia, but one doesn’t have to look far to discover that every nation has its own version of history.
It also becomes evident that the perfect place to sow the seeds of fervent nationalism is in the classroom with young impressionable minds.
This summer, new Chinese history textbooks for Hong Kong senior secondary school students have hit the shelves. For the first time the texts include events up to the end of the last century – including the Tiananmen Square protests in 1989 – under the revised curriculum for Form Four and Five students. Previously, the Hong Kong curriculum only covered the years up to 1976.
Controversy erupted when the contents of the textbooks first came to light a few months ago, with educators accusing the authors of the Hong Kong textbooks of “distorting history” by failing to detail the bloody crackdown by the central government on pro-democracy protesters.
Scholars said this incident showed that textbook writers and publishers had shied away from touching on sensitive issues or producing material which ran against the thinking of the central government on controversial historical events.
But they also noted that the inclusion of at least some detail from the June 4 incident – which is totally absent from mainland textbooks – demonstrated a telling difference between education and textbooks in Hong Kong and across the border.
Most interesting is the description of mainland textbooks that write about Japan as though it poses a clear and present danger. If anyone doubts young Chinese readers aren’t programmed early, they need to wake up.
“The mainland textbooks used sensational wording and bloody photos to recount the crimes the Japanese committed during the war,” he [HK history professor Siu Kam-wah] said.
In the unit devoted to the anti-Japanese war in the history textbook published by People’s Education Publications (Ren min jiao yu chu ban she) for senior secondary school students – the most popular textbook on the mainland – Dr Siu said the text focused on crimes committed by the Japanese through graphic words and pictures.
One paragraph reads: “Wherever the Japanese invaders went, they burned, killed, raped and looted, committing all crimes of sin. In February 1937, after the Japanese troops invaded Nanjing, they carried out a large-scale massacre of the residents of Nanjing. Within six weeks, they had massacred over 300,000 Nanjing residents and unarmed Chinese soldiers. They used various brutal means to carry out the massacre – some were shot, some were stabbed, some were buried alive and some were burned to death.”
In one of the exercises allocated to students, the textbook cited an incident in August 2003, when a worker was killed and more than 40 were poisoned by mustard gas abandoned by the Japanese during the second world war in Northeast China.
Dr Siu said this was aimed at reminding the students that the threat of Japanese militarism still existed today.
Instead of concentrating on the brutal crimes committed by the Japanese during wartime, Hong Kong textbooks focus on the background to the Japanese invasion of China, how the war broke out and the reasons for China’s success.
In other words, the Hong Kong students are being taught to think, those in the mainland are being taught to react. Many Hong Kongers harbor huge resentment against the Japanese, understandably. But a conversation with them hardly resembles one with an impassioned mainlander who grew up on these books.
No big surprise here; anyone watching the anti-Japanese protests or reading about the web sites based purely on Japan hatred know this kind of conditioning had to start at an early age, especially considering the generation bearing the most animosity was born more than 40 years after the “sins” were perpetrated. (And yes, I know, Japanese leaders still go to that wicked shrine!)
As far as textbook doctoring goes, all I can say is, “Ye who are without sin, throw the fist stone.”
Via CDT.
1
By Bing
Richard
Can you indicate where the text on Japan’s invasion you cited is doctored please?
August 4, 2005 @ 4:33 pm | Comment
2
By Bing
“Wherever the Japanese invaders went, they burned, killed, raped and looted, committing all crimes of sin.”
This is not what I learned in history class in China.
My textbook didn’t say “Wherever”.
I doubt this is the orignal text.
August 4, 2005 @ 4:37 pm | Comment
3
By richard
It’s doctored to incite and to give generate outrage as opposed to wisdom. It goes into gory, graphic detail complete with photographs and implications that the barbarism of Japan 60 years ago is still killing Chinese today (the mustard gas example). At the same time, it says nothing about the bloodshed on the TSM. In fact, according to these textbooks that was the day when “nothing happened.”That is “doctoring” – fixing th history to meet your political objectives.
August 4, 2005 @ 6:07 pm | Comment
4
By kevin
As I’ve always said, no one does a better job of doctoring history than the Chinese. Japanese are monsters, GLF was three years of natural disasters, the CR was the Gang of Four and Lin Biao’s problem, mao was 70% right and 30% wrong (whatever that means), nothing happened in 89.
no wonder there’s such a bunch of misinformed people here!
i’ve never met a japanese person who did not know about the crimes of ww2, but how many young chinese have i met who described tsm as a pacification of turmoil? or who really belived their country could never survive without the party’s “guidance”?
August 4, 2005 @ 8:00 pm | Comment
5
By Conrad
We all know that counter-revolutionary houligans attacked the patriotic members of the Peoples Liberation Army by thowing themselves under their tanks..
August 4, 2005 @ 8:27 pm | Comment
6
By Bing
Sure, tell Chinese, don’t talk about Japan before cleaning up your own shit.
Does a masochist have the right to seek justice for being raped?
Or a judge in your logic would tell her: you must state clearly that you are a masochist to the jury, otherwise they would consider you were doctoring this case.
August 5, 2005 @ 1:06 am | Comment
7
By Bing
“We all know that counter-revolutionary houligans attacked the patriotic members of the Peoples Liberation Army by thowing themselves under their tanks..”
You never know.
August 5, 2005 @ 1:07 am | Comment
8
By Thomas
Bing says: “We all know that counter-revolutionary houligans attacked the patriotic members of the Peoples Liberation Army by thowing themselves under their tanks..”
You never know.”
My response:
No…YOU never know. There are too many witness accounts that described the event. People in the rest of the world can hear them. And if the CCP could relax a bit, maybe you WOULD know.
That is the whole point here. And your overly defensive attitude supports entirely the idea of doctored history being taught to the masses.
Bing says: “Sure, tell Chinese, don’t talk about Japan before cleaning up your own shit.”
I respond: Why not tell them that? How many times have I heard a Chinese person say “you Americans should not talk about the Chinese without clearing up your own shit.”
I think the whole world needs to look in a mirror sometime. And the Chinese are no exception.
August 5, 2005 @ 1:43 am | Comment
9
By Bing
Yes, Chinese are no exception.
What if the relatives of the victims of TS also participated in riot demonstrations against Japan?
What would you tell them?
Don’t be hypocritical, seek you justic from CCP before shouting at Japan?
August 5, 2005 @ 1:57 am | Comment
10
By Bing
I respond: Why not tell them that? How many times have I heard a Chinese person say “you Americans should not talk about the Chinese without clearing up your own shit.”
And you know what’s the difference here?
US regards itself the world police and put its fiinger everywhere in everything that is really none of your business!
Either TS 89 or War shrine, they are matters involving Chinese. Do we have the right to take priority and choose the way to handle them?
I’m not saying the way CCP handling them is justifiable.
The point is, that’s our own affair.
Of course when somebody else wants to interfere to act as a judge or juror, they’d better clean up their own shit.
August 5, 2005 @ 2:04 am | Comment
11
By Bing
too many grammar errors sorry about that.
August 5, 2005 @ 2:07 am | Comment
12
By GWBH
Leaps of logic are not usually referred to as errors in grammar.
August 5, 2005 @ 2:23 am | Comment
13
By Bing
I’m ok with my logic but sorry if there is any retardation here.
August 5, 2005 @ 2:34 am | Comment
14
By kevin
In fact a number of 89 relatives wrote a letter to the government asking what authority they had to criticize Japan.
Following that, their already limited daily freedoms were restricted even further.
Is that what you would call internal affairs?
August 5, 2005 @ 2:40 am | Comment
15
By Bing
Actually, what authority does CCP have to do anything?
In your logic, the CCP has none.
So what?
August 5, 2005 @ 2:43 am | Comment
16
By kevin
as wen said, only a country that is willing to honestly face its past, taking history as a mirror, can play a more important role in international relations.
the irony of a chinese politician saying that was simply too much for me to handle.
August 5, 2005 @ 2:43 am | Comment
17
By kevin
Bing, it was you who brought up the relatives of 89. I wanted to point out your misuse of this group, as they are a group of people who have a hard enough life without having to be dragged out to serve your broken logic.
August 5, 2005 @ 2:48 am | Comment
18
By Bing
Sure, that’s quite ironical, I was laughing when first reading it.
I suppose he intended to say something like: only a country that is willing to honestly face its past participation in international affairs, taking history as a mirror, can play a more important role in international relations.
August 5, 2005 @ 2:48 am | Comment
19
By Bing
“Bing, it was you who brought up the relatives of 89. I wanted to point out your misuse of this group, as they are a group of people who have a hard enough life without having to be dragged out to serve your broken logic. ”
The victims of (the legacy of) brutal crimes of Japan had and have hard life too.
And If the broken logic converyed nothing to you, just ignore them, sorry for wasting your time.
August 5, 2005 @ 2:53 am | Comment
20
By kevin
I never, at any point, said anything minimizing the suffering of Japan’s victims in WWII.
But anyway, Bing, did you read that letter? If you wanted, I could send it to you. I think it’s useful reading.
August 5, 2005 @ 2:56 am | Comment
21
By Bing
I never, at any point, said anything minimizing the suffering of CCP’s victims in TS 89.
But anyway, kevin, I know and understand what happened, so thank you for your offer.
August 5, 2005 @ 2:58 am | Comment
22
By kevin
But using them as an example in the CCP’s anti-Japan campaign is a little unfair. They’re pretty clear about the problems facing China, and Japan is not high on their list. Of course, I am not their spokesperson, but those whom I know would be less than happy with the analogy.
August 5, 2005 @ 3:06 am | Comment
23
By Conrad
Bing writes:
Wrong. You are trying to have it both ways.
When Japan says such visits are a matter of Japanese internal affairs, China screams that they are not, that they are a matter of international concern.
And when China uses the shrine visits as justification for blocking Japan’s ascent to the UN Security Council, China has unquestionably made it a matter of international affairs.
August 5, 2005 @ 3:09 am | Comment
24
By Bing
Conrad,
Don’t take it without context.
War shrine is always a matter between China and Japan. In this sense, it surely is an international affair.
When I say “its our own affair”, that means “if it doesn’t involve you, it’s none of your business. And if you still want to interfere acting as a judge or juror, first clean up your own shit”
August 5, 2005 @ 3:20 am | Comment
25
By kevin
Who gets to determine what “involves” others? I get the sense that in some people’s minds, this is solely up to China to decide.
August 5, 2005 @ 3:45 am | Comment
26
By Bing
That’s another topic.
August 5, 2005 @ 3:50 am | Comment
27
By mel baruso
If Japan were to legislate discrimination against its burakumin today, that would be morally reprehensible but it would be her “internal affair”-the same way that the TAMSq tragedy is a reckoning to come between the CPC government and China’s people.
But rewriting textbooks to mitigate Imperial Japan’s unprovoked aggression – bombing civilians, sex slavery, biological experiments – and to honour the soldiers who committed these crimes against humanity, are patently not an “internal affair” of Tokyo.
August 5, 2005 @ 4:55 am | Comment
28
By LC
Oh quit the bellyaching over the crimes against the Chinees and some supposed ‘atrocities’ in Nanking or elsewhere already. Your ‘atrocities’ were just the Nips fighting a war in their best feudal era mindset; the more brutal the conduct of the war is the sooner your foes are brought to the heel. China the giant nation that insists under the guise of one of the few remaining socialist paradise she won’t seek global hegemony would have done the same thing the same way had she been capable. One just have to look back 2,000 or so years of glorious Chinees history to see how the magnanimous Chinees nation suborned her neighbors. If you insist on calling certain event ‘atrocities’ must you stop at circa 1,940s, shouldn’t you try going back further?
August 5, 2005 @ 5:02 am | Comment
29
By Bing
Enjoy yourself.
August 5, 2005 @ 5:18 am | Comment
30
By mel baruso
whether china will or will not do that is hypothetical, tho neo-cons have deafened us with their sabre-rattling abt the China threat.
right and wrong about those Nips fighting in their best feudal mindset.
they were trying to deliver a short, sharp shock, aware that a long campaign in v ast subcontinental country would bog them down and drain resources.
but at the same time, the China war was really more cruel than necessary.
Unlike Western colonialists, who attempted to justify their conquests under the banner of racial/cultural superiority, the Japanese were dealing with Chinese/Koreans from the same cultural mould. The only way to subjugate them was to “impress” (very strongly) them with Japan’s superiority.
We are discussing a phase in history, when Imperial Japan attempted to conquer China, based on the myth of its master race, int he same way the Nazis consigned six million Jews to death.
If the innocent Jews can get their due, why not the Chinese.
August 5, 2005 @ 5:22 am | Comment
31
By LC
In the interest of fairness, I must.
August 5, 2005 @ 5:22 am | Comment
32
By Bing
Admire your effort in gleaning your crappy outcries from the 2000 years history to excuse your sins.
Regards
August 5, 2005 @ 5:26 am | Comment
33
By LC
‘the China war was really more cruel than necessary’
Where did you get off to apply standard like that? As I said before, why not go further back? Napoleon, Alexander the Great? See I m not bashing the wonderful Chinees for the its own sake?
It’s how wars had been fought as long as man learnt to pick up an arrow in anger.
August 5, 2005 @ 5:31 am | Comment
34
By LC
And there’s nothing wrong in our present context to harp on if you so desire the threat of likely and potential adversaries. The better to contain and manage the socalled threats. If you refer to history as guide to how best to behave, many a wars had been fought with blood drenched consequences between belligerents that were evenly matched or thought it had been the case.
August 5, 2005 @ 5:39 am | Comment
35
By LC
And its debatable whether all Chinees can be innocent. But my point has nothing to do with that; it’s that in war shit happened, people combatants or civilians get dead, sometimes for the purpose of making a point.
August 5, 2005 @ 5:43 am | Comment
36
By Bing
The point is Japan invaded China and refuses to face its past and still wants cooperation and peace.
If Japan dosen’t need China’s cooperation and a peaceful coexistence and development and your kinds don’t give a shit what China thinks, then just don’t give your shit and no need for talks.
August 5, 2005 @ 5:54 am | Comment
37
By LC
I don’t understand the censoring.
August 5, 2005 @ 6:22 am | Comment
38
By LC
Now there we are.
To Bing, you should quit sounding like a girl.
About that ‘refusal to face the past’ I take it you mean a public for the record admission or confession and I do think it wise to tread this seemingly unpopular path.
As we all know how adept China is at turning her history of ‘victimization’ into a veritable cottage industry couple that with the prevalent global modes of seeking justice and money compensation(emphasis on the latter) it’s right to be weary about all these ‘heart wrenching’ clamor for ‘coming clean’.
For her part I daresay Japan has done enough inthe last half C or so to aquit herself chiefly in humanitarian endeavors which translates into handout of hugh wads of yen.
Both China and Japan need each other as regards cooperation and coexistence unresolved issues notwithstanding.
China its my considered opinion needs the other when it comes to development.
August 5, 2005 @ 6:33 am | Comment
39
By LC
Thank you Richard, you had me browning my pants just now.
August 5, 2005 @ 6:34 am | Comment
40
By Raj
“US regards itself the world police and put its fiinger everywhere in everything that is really none of your business!”
How was it any of China’s business to stop the UN from taking serious action against Sudan over Darfur? Or does it know better than the whole international community how the UN should conduct itself? How many people do you think died in Darfur because Beijing was more interested in protecting its energy concessions with Sudan than letting the UN stop the genocide?
China has its fingers in pies just like the US. It’s a case of the teapot calling the kettle black.
August 5, 2005 @ 6:38 am | Comment
41
By Bing
It’s funny you could wrong China’s effort to prevent interference in Sudan’s civil war or internal affairs.
And who represents international community? US and allies?
You were wrong about Iraq, and plenty of more others, intentionally or not. Who knows this time what’s your true intention to interfere?
August 5, 2005 @ 6:45 am | Comment
42
By Raj
Bing writes:
But Chinese people do try to have things both ways. There is no subject they feel they cannot comment on, whether it is Israel (technically an INTERNAL issue), Iraq or Afghanistan. But as soon as anyone wants to comment on Taiwan, Sudan, Zimbabwe, etc many say “THIS IS INTERNAL AFFAIR – STOP INTERFERING!”
You can’t have your cake and eat it. If you don’t want people to “interfere” in various matters, you yourself have to stop talking about things that don’t concern China.
August 5, 2005 @ 6:47 am | Comment
43
By Bing
And in terms of Darfur, all you have seen or heard is how the government commit crimes to civilians.
What about the rebels? Do you know anything about the rebels? Do they kill as well?
Why US and allies don’t support the Sudan government to ease the rebellion. In stead, the first cry is given to the government.
It’s not a new trick for them to overthrow any government, either democratic or not, that they don’t fancy.
August 5, 2005 @ 6:49 am | Comment
44
By Bing
“But Chinese people do try to have things both ways. There is no subject they feel they cannot comment on, whether it is Israel (technically an INTERNAL issue), Iraq or Afghanistan. But as soon as anyone wants to comment on Taiwan, Sudan, Zimbabwe, etc many say “THIS IS INTERNAL AFFAIR – STOP INTERFERING!”
Don’t you understand the difference between discussions of ordinary people and actions of governements?
Does Chinese government like yours scavenge around peeking into others’ business?
August 5, 2005 @ 6:52 am | Comment
45
By Bing
LC
I’m not a girl, but I quit, bye.
August 5, 2005 @ 6:55 am | Comment
46
By Bing
“But Chinese people do try to have things both ways. There is no subject they feel they cannot comment on, whether it is Israel (technically an INTERNAL issue), Iraq or Afghanistan. But as soon as anyone wants to comment on Taiwan, Sudan, Zimbabwe, etc many say “THIS IS INTERNAL AFFAIR – STOP INTERFERING!”
Don’t make up arguments out of fake nonsense.
Whom have you been discussing Taiwan, Zimbabwe or Sudan issues with? Aliens?
August 5, 2005 @ 7:07 am | Comment
47
By richard
LC – “censoring”? I was asleep, what happened? Nothing was censored.
August 5, 2005 @ 7:37 am | Comment
48
By KLS
waaah, richard even censors stuff in his dreams! anti-china fascist pig!!!
August 5, 2005 @ 2:09 pm | Comment
49
By richard
I have unique powers….
August 5, 2005 @ 2:22 pm | Comment
50
By Johnny K
My high school American history textbook said that Jimmy Carter was a saint and Reagan was simultaneously an idiot and an evil evil genius.
Crappy texbook it was indeed. Damn liberal media 😉
August 5, 2005 @ 3:52 pm | Comment
51
By richard
Jimmy Carter was an incompetent, well-meaning jerk who only distinguished himself after leaving office.
Johnny, I presume you are joking about your history textbooks. Most rarely make negative political judgements on American presidents, though they make lots of subtle jabs at Communist governments (at least when I was in school).
August 5, 2005 @ 4:08 pm | Comment
52
By Raj
Bing,
I didn’t know Chinese people were aliens – I know a lot of the nationalists are a bit “out of this world” but that’s going too far. Have a bit more respect for your common man.
When I talk about things like Taiwan with some Chinese, they start to talk about it because they think they’re so right they can’t be proven wrong. But as soon as one starts to make intelligent arguments/bring in evidence/whatever, they go on the defensive and start saying the things I jokingly mentioned. I have come across few Chinese who don’t use the “none-of-your-business” argument when they feel under pressure over Taiwan.
Oh, and by the way, the fact you actually tried to defend the actions of Khartoum sickened me, given that the only people in the international community who have tried to defend the action there are undemocratic autocracies like China, which don’t give a fig about human rights even towards their own citizens anyway, let alone laowai.
Yes, there are rebels but it doesn’t justify what the Sudanese have been and are still up to. They’re using it as an excuse to persecute innocent people. And it’s childish to say that we’re trying to overthrow the government when we obviously have no interests there. You’re just trying to divert attention away from the fact China has more interests there than we do. In any case, is Amnesty International trying to overthrow the Sudanese government when it asks the UNSC to take action? The international community was ignoring Darfur until the NGOs and international media drew attention to it.
August 5, 2005 @ 4:48 pm | Comment
53
By mel_baruso
“It’s debatable that all Chinese are innocent”and in war, there’s collateral damage.
Whoever said all Chinese are innocent? Probably plenty of bad people were killed by the Japanese, too. Does that mean all Jews were innocent, and therefore deserved re-dress?
The point is about Japan’s recalcitrance about admitting war guilt and making a total apology (the shatzai), not how many bad or innocent people were killed.
As for your point about collateral damage, you merely buttress my point. Yes, shit happens in a war – bystanders get bombed, people on the Tube, for instance, get blown to bits because of terrorists (yes, that’s a war already).
But it’s NOT “shit that happened” when you deliberately choose civilian targets to bomb, or massacre a whole city, or conduct live experiments on people. Isn’t all that similar to Nazis killing off the Jews in a deliberate policy of ethnic cleansing?
August 5, 2005 @ 8:26 pm | Comment
54
By mel_baruso
“People on the Tube get blown to bits”…oops, thinking went askew.
that’s not collateral damage, that’s deliberate targeting of civilians to achieve objective. Rather like the Japanese going after innocents to cow everyone.
August 5, 2005 @ 9:01 pm | Comment
55
By MeiZhongTai
One Post, Two Articles
Two blogposts caught my eye this morning. One is from Peking Duck and one is from SimonWorld. Both are interesting and worthy of a read.
August 5, 2005 @ 9:06 pm | Comment
56
By LC
I do think deliberately targeting civilians for some tactical purposes fall under ‘shits happen’ category. War is that messy, anything goes, anything can happen. It’s only in recent times that we see the advent of surgical precision warfare but still zero civilian casuality is not guaranteed.
What the Japs was accused of having had perpetrated in China vis a vis Chinees civilians was distinctly different from your Nazi parallel. True there had been an element of racial hatred. The purpose though had been to completely deflate Chinees’ will to fight, not an attempt to exterminate a whole race. And the animosity between the two nations had been longstanding and is ongoing still. Life was plenty cheap in those parts back then. China had shown herself quite capable of overkill as well. Against her own people yet. KMT’S purge of the ChiComs in the 20s, the warlords’ squabbles immediately after the founding of the ROC, even as late as the 60’s to 70’s we have the Cultural Revolution. China surely can’t claim to have the upper hand in respecting the sanctity of human lives.
When it comes to admitting war guilt, the Japs can’t be too careful as for what specific eventssaid admission should be proffered. Behind all those passionate demands for it and indignities over the unforthcomingness of the Japs in this regard there’s always the consideration of monetary compensation.
August 5, 2005 @ 11:45 pm | Comment
57
By LC
Richard perhaps you have put in some sort of automatic trigger on certain incorrect words or forms to ban publication. I thought I nearly lost an opportunity to share with the world my beautifully composed treatise?
August 5, 2005 @ 11:50 pm | Comment
58
By richard
LC, there is a filter to stop spam. If you ever post a comment that is blocked, email it to me and I will make sure it gets posted.
August 5, 2005 @ 11:52 pm | Comment
59
By mel baruso
So civilian attacks are just shit that happens. It’s just too bad for those people in 9/11, Marriot Jakarta, Bali, London tube, then.
LIfe was cheap in those parts then – right, so it was OK for Imperial Japan to kill off as many as it could. Life in those parts is only valued if we can get political mileage (human rights?) out of it today.
China doesn’t respect or value its own people, so that also excuses Japan for fudging its war record.
Besides, Japan of course must be circumspect about what it apologises for because allthat these people want is $$$, esp $$$. Right.
Perhaps Japan should try to even issue a heartfelt apology first – a “shatzai” – xie jui, forgiveness for crime- instead of the owa-bi, self-remorse.
Goodnight.
BTW: I am not from mainland China or HK, and have no monetary pursuit tho my ancestors suffered their cruelty.
But in Malaysia, the matter of Japan’s wartime record remains alive among all races that borne the brunt of Japan’s brutality.
August 6, 2005 @ 11:07 pm | Comment
60
By ACB
Richard
‘That shrine’ as you so nicely put it is Japan’s national war shrine and it pre dates WWII by over 100 years. You have just insulted 2.5 million people, half of whom died in internal conflicts and who never saw a foreigner, let alone killed one.
Maybe I should start spitting on your country’s civil war shrines because some of the confederate solders entomed there were slavers.
‘That shrine’ is Shinto, no ancestor worship goes on there. It does not glorify the dead, it does not ask them for furtune and it does not give them honor because Shinto is the worship of natural spirits and not dead ancestors.
Don’t listen to the tabloids, worshiping at ‘that shrine’ can only be an act of peace and rememberance, and it is done without judgement.
August 9, 2005 @ 1:41 am | Comment