Dilbert_X wrote:It took the dropping of a fusion bomb on Japan for them to accept that fusion with the world order was the better option over world domination.
you are so full of this ahistorical claptrap, i really wonder how you believe the rubbish you spout. you would really do well to take a summer course in a history (or a humanities!) degree to practice what you preach, scoff a little less, and learn how to construe an argument.
it (arguably, at least) took an atomic bomb to stop an imperial, militarised japan with a war government on a war footing, committed to an extreme ideology of racial purity and emperor-worship. of course, you with your racial-essentialist vision of the world see it in simpler terms: the jap menace had to be brought to heel! as if before being terra-formed into a radioactive car park they were some species of dog or were pig ignorant. you evidently have little to no understanding of why japan even adopted an aggressive phase of expansion aided by an extreme form of ethno-nationalism.
ironically japan's own imperial ambitions and efforts at becoming a major power were highly influenced by .... 'the world order' such as it existed in the 19th century. you make it sound as if they were an alien species who had to be talked around to the good old ways of western civilisation. very odd. 'fusion with the world order'. ah, yes, that highly cohesive world order that existed before 1938 or 1894. lol. europe's over-extended and in some cases decaying empires in the far-east were an easy land grab; america's actions in the 19th century could hardly be called non-acquisitive, and were a same response to the waning imperial power of spain (mexico, guam, cuba, puerto rico ... the philippines); japan were already playing the game of the 'world order'.
how is there a comparison with contemporary china in any way? why would china need to be so aggressive and acquisitive? your best explanation thus far seems to be 'they will do it to put down discontent at home', an extremely spurious line of thinking when you're talking about mobilising armies of millions of troops in massive ground wars. china is achieving global pre-eminence through 'soft power' and 'neo-colonial' means in africa and the developing world. they are already one of the heaviest investors in africa -- all that and they have about 2 military bases on the entire continent. japan's expansion and organisation at the turn of the 20th century must be understood in the paradigm of 'the age of empire', not to say in the history of nascent fascism and military-industrialism. china's growth and rise has been achieved almost entirely using the market and trade, not conquest, an option that wasn't available to japan in 1880.
the rules of the game have fundamentally changed since then, and your schoolboy reading on the 'evil axis' and vague gestures towards 'china in 1949', 'japan being nuked' are not going to cut it. like it or not, their syncretic, hybrid, un-pindownable combination of communism and capitalism has lifted the greatest number of people out of poverty in the history of the world, and they haven't had to make military attempts at 'world domination' to do it.
Last edited by uziq (2020-04-26 02:07:55)