What's with the left's obsession with decrying the US occupation of Japan? They'd almost make you forget that, even without American influence Japan’s a reactionary nation.
Fact of the matter is that imagining some sort of Japan without a military is absolute delusional nonsense. Let's not delude ourselves: Either the US acts as their military or they get their own military. Without their own remilitarization, there's no way they willingly kick out the US; if the US ever withdraws, they'd immediately go towards remilitarization. Even just for the sake of their occupation of the Diaoyu Dao, they will want a military. There's no utopian "no military" option where they just willingly give up the Diaoyu Dao and become friendly with China. So what's the better option? Obviously its better for Japanese militarists to be subservient to the USA than for them to be wholly let loose.
This is probably the reason the PRC sends warships over to the Diaoyu Dao while also condemning remilitarization, they know what they want: they'd rather keep the status quo of US occupation of Japan for as long as possible. By letting Japan know they'll militarily resolve the Diaoyu Dao dispute if they kick out the US bases, they are ensuring that the US bases are perpetual. Which is their goal, because frankly, its better for China that Japan is kept down like a dog. Who knows what they'll try if they're given sovereignty again.
>but, its hampering cross-strait reunification!
And a sovereign Japan wouldn't be just as hostile to China reintegrating Taiwan? No, they'd be just as aggressive about it.
>but, its colonization of the ryukyu people! Ryukyu can be independent and demilitarized!
Ryukyuan independence is supported by like, 3% of the Ryukyuan people. The idea of Ryukyu being independent is just as delusional as the idea of Japan both being sovereign and demilitarized. Fact of the matter is that Japan will have control over these islands for the foreseeable future and its not even a question to anyone except delusional Chinese nationalists who want their vassal state back. Live in reality: either Japanese militarists or US military bases dominate these islands. No third option, and its better for China if its the US military for as long as possible.
>>2260926>What's with the left's obsession with decrying the US occupation of Japan?because US imperialists occupy East Asia and rape Japanese women while on R/R
>even without American influence Japan’s a reactionary nation.ok that doesn't mean Japanese civilians deserved to be raped by burgerreich troops nor does it mean burgerreich troops should occupy East Asia in order to destabilize and loot the place
>>2260926>Japan’s a reactionary nationwoodoo
>Diaoyu Daonot even blood and soil but blood and a couple of shitty rocks
>the PRC […] know what they want: they'd rather keep the status quo of US occupation of Japanthis was true in the 60s and 70s, right now it seems more like China is trying to drive a wedge between the US and Japan
>a sovereign Japan wouldn't be just as hostile to China reintegrating Taiwanmaybe, but it would be considerably weaker as would the US position without the Okinawa bases
>>2260935Kishi Nobusuke, a class A war criminal (though never convicted), even became a prime minister
most famous for the 1960 security treaty that rebalanced japan-us relations from an unstable occupation to a perpetual client
>>2262085china was in the middle of its civil war, korea was occupied and split
the rehabilitation was for opposing the Soviet Union and Japan's own communists and socialists
>>2260926>they are reactionary so its good if they are occupied by the US empire so it can make sure it stay fully on their side!what a retarded fucking post
>they'd immediately go towards remilitarization<he thinks they arent remilitarizing already
>No, they'd be just as aggressive about it.no, because they're not a nuclear power and would have obvious interests in easing tensions.
>its better for China if its the US military how can someone actually believe this bullshit?
I thought you'd be defending the occupation, but actually you are saying the occupation is good because it's bad for japan and japan is bad, essentially? That's an opinion.
>Even just for the sake of their occupation of the Diaoyu Dao
>There's no utopian "no military" option where they just willingly give up the Diaoyu Dao
Nationalist nonsense. Made-up issue. No one ever cared about these rocks before around the 70's.
Why do you expect Japan to accept to never ever have a military again and just trust that the international community or whatever guarantees them? Listen to yourself. You are demanding things that are impossible to demand and for what reason? What about Japan is this original sin style evil?
Provocations by "Japan" over the Senkaku islands are mostly deliberate escalations by right-wing groups, which if you are at all aware of japanese politics, know are basically yakuza thug groups heavily financed by the Americans. The japanese right-wing is bought and paid for by the americans. This is historical fact you can look up. Most of these groups were set-up either immediately after the occupation or during the New Left period to prop up the LDP.
>And a sovereign Japan wouldn't be just as hostile to China reintegrating Taiwan? No, they'd be just as aggressive about it.
Do you actually know what the reason for japanese preocupation for "Taiwan" is?
If you are a marxist you know how these things go and it's not because japan is uniquely reactionary, it's not because of conspiratard nonsense about how "Taiwan" is run collaborators.
The main reason is that a large portion of japanese commerce goes through the maritime area around "Taiwan". If China controls "Taiwan" and the South China Sea, they can very effectively strangle Japanese maritime routes to the west of japan. OBVIOUS GIGANTIC NATIONAL SECURITY ISSUE.
It's not because of any WW2 remnants. The "Taiwansese" government is the one Japan fought in the War for crying out loud. All of the defensiveness around "Taiwan" is a fabrication. Base superstructure etc. If Japan has a government run by the american's, no compromise is possible.
If Japan has a rational, non-US occupied government there is the possibility of reaching an agreement with China over this issue.
> Obviously its better for Japanese militarists to be subservient to the USA than for them to be wholly let loose.
Japanese militarists? Did you crash in from 1945?
Anyway, How could it possibly be better for china for the "Japanese militarists", to have basically the same goals, but also have the americans back them up?
In reality you have two options: Japan is a normal indepndent country with a military that can make geopolitical decisions, which at this point favors alignment with China like Ishiba paving the way for, or Japan also has a military but it answers to the psychotic american empire.
>Ryukyuan independence
Thanking for having one sensible opinion. The uncritical support for "Ryukyuan" or "Ainu" nationalism in leftist circles makes your head spin if you know anything about the region.
>>2262954>So it would be better for Japan to remilitarize so they could be in a position to possibly expel the US?Yes?
Onto itself, having a country not be occupied by the american empire is good.
You want american bases to be as far away from China. You want american control and influence over East Asia to weaken.
How could you
possibly think that having tens of thousands of rapists under United States Indo-Pacific Command right next to China is better?
The only way this could make sense is if you are a Hitlerite and think Japan is instantly going to invade china because they have the militarism genes.
>>2263457Kun in Chinese would usually be "bro" or "sis", 哥，姐. 先生(mister)，小姐(miss)，女士
(madam, literally female scholar/warrior).
Chinese are often called by title or job role quite often in formal settings, but the equivalent of the Japanese system of honorifics might be the complicated set of address for the specific family relationship.
Unique IPs: 17