The Royal Forums Coat of Arms


Join The Royal Forums Today
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #21  
Old 04-01-2009, 04:37 AM
Bones's Avatar
Nobility
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Laredo, United States
Posts: 455
The only thing holding up the earlier surrender of Japan was their concern that the Emperor be protected and the US was adamant that the surrender be "unconditional" however they did finally say that the fate of the emperor would be in the hands of the Japanese. Because of that, if they had removed Hirohito, I think the Japanese, with justification, would have taken it as a betrayal and would have fought the US occupation tooth and nail which would have meant a terrible death toll for everyone.

Personally, I even have a problem with the US insisting that the Emperor renounce his divinity. Regardless of the circumstances it does not seem right for one country to forcefully change the religion of another country; which seems to be basically what happened. I have heard that Japan is largely non-religious today and I have sometimes wondered if their previous belief-system being so abruptly upset might have had something to do with this.

And I also agree too (sadly) that the US has shown a great deal of prejudice against monarchies in foreign policy over many years. It was evident in the overthrow of the Queen of Hawaii, both Mexican Emperors, rigging the overthrow of the last Vietnamese Emperor, demanding the removal of the Kaiser to make peace with Germany and when the East European countries were considering the issue in the aftermath of their restored independence I remember Clinton's Secretary of State (I think talking about Romania or Bulgaria) saying, "we don't do kings" and effectively killing the debate. The US (well, President Carter anyway) also refused to help the Shah of Iran who had been our ally which led to his overthrow. Anyway, I won't go on, if I've strayed off on an inappropriate rant I do apologize.
__________________

Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 04-19-2009, 10:33 AM
Marquesa d Yolombó's Avatar
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Medellín, Colombia
Posts: 129
Well, I read once that (in The Times, but I don't have the link), when the Persian Shah was kicked out of his throne, Emperor Akihito was so scared that he learned to type, so he could "work as a typist", as he said. This mean that the Emperor wouldn't have left Japan, but get integrated in the Japanese society, as families from nobility have done since the postwar.
__________________

Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 04-26-2009, 02:49 AM
Commoner
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: tokyo, Japan
Posts: 19
Japanese emperor has never had an interst's conflict against ppls like western kings
Tenno has never had a power from ancient.
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 04-27-2009, 10:10 PM
Mermaid1962's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: NearTheCoast, Canada
Posts: 6,302
Japan is still officially Shinto. The Emperor is still the High Priest of that religion and does rituals and offers prayers on behalf of the nation.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bones View Post
Personally, I even have a problem with the US insisting that the Emperor renounce his divinity. Regardless of the circumstances it does not seem right for one country to forcefully change the religion of another country; which seems to be basically what happened. I have heard that Japan is largely non-religious today and I have sometimes wondered if their previous belief-system being so abruptly upset might have had something to do with this.
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 04-28-2009, 05:04 PM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Spring Hill, United States
Posts: 2,978
Nothing much, I believe. Times evolve and who would have continued to believe that he was a god? Too much easy info now. General MacArthur was smart in leaving him as a titular head. It did no harm. Bones, your lack of correct information on some of the other things is great. The Kaiser was not dethroned by the U.S. alone. It was the wish if the victorious powers. The emperors of Mexico were puppets to European interests. As for the Shah, it was a political hassle not because he was a monarch, but because of political situations.
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 05-02-2009, 04:27 PM
Bones's Avatar
Nobility
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Laredo, United States
Posts: 455
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mermaid1962 View Post
Japan is still officially Shinto. The Emperor is still the High Priest of that religion and does rituals and offers prayers on behalf of the nation.
Japan is not "officially" anything. Shintoism still exists of course in its earlier form but "State Shinto" was was the official religion before WW2 was abolished by order of the US occupation forces. I know the Emperor still performs Shinto ceremonies on certain occasions but he is no longer considered divine nor is that an indication of Japan having an official state religion. King Juan Carlos is Catholic but Catholicism is not the official state religion of Spain.

Quote:
Originally Posted by COUNTESS View Post
Nothing much, I believe. Times evolve and who would have continued to believe that he was a god? Too much easy info now. General MacArthur was smart in leaving him as a titular head. It did no harm. Bones, your lack of correct information on some of the other things is great. The Kaiser was not dethroned by the U.S. alone. It was the wish if the victorious powers. The emperors of Mexico were puppets to European interests. As for the Shah, it was a political hassle not because he was a monarch, but because of political situations.
Por favor, double check wikipedia or something before being critical of others. Of course the US was not alone but the US did make the removal of the Kaiser a condition of ending the war -that is a fact. Many in the US also wanted the Kaiser executed as a war criminal but the Dutch Queen showed better judgement and would not give him up. Even King George V intervened to stop that issue.

Please to tell me which foreign power the first Mexican Emperor was a puppet of? He had no foreign troops backing him, in fact it was he who finally succeeded in getting the Spanish troops out of the country. Whose puppet was he (I'm talking about Iturbide not Maximilian) please explain? Even Emperor Maximilian was hardly a puppet. He was constantly at odds with the French because he would not simply bend to their will. To the extent that he was he was no more a European puppet than Juarez was a puppet of US interests. He sold out considerable tracts of Mexican sovereignty to the US in return for their support, his forces were clothed, armed and equipped by the US and thousands of US troops fought on his behalf. As for the Shah of Iran, you can say it was this, that or the other but he was a monarch and he was basically sold out by the US which refused him the support he needed and kept telling him to take no action when things could have been stopped. Read some of Empress Farah's writings, she makes it clear that had President Carter kept faith with her husband the Ayatollah would never have taken over.

And also, I am not saying the Japanese Emperor should still be considered a god, all I was trying to say was that whether the Japanese believe him to be a god or not should be their decision and not that of any other foreign power. No foreign power should be able to tell any country who or what they can consider a god.
__________________
"Oh, God, I could be bounded in a nutshell, and count myself a king of infinite space, were it not that I have bad dreams".
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 05-02-2009, 09:47 PM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Spring Hill, United States
Posts: 2,978
All I said is that the U.S. did not act alone against the Kaiser. Secondly, Iturbide in his Plan of Iguala wanted Mexico to be autonomous, but ruled by a member of the Bourbon family and still under the authority of Spain. And Maximaillian was a French puppet, mostly.

As for the Shah, do you think that Farah's account is accurate or biased. That was her husband and she loved him. He was a liability, but in 1979 President Carter allowed him to get treatment in New York. The Iranians demanded we turn him over and we didn't and so they took 52 American Hostages and held them, in miserable conditions, for 444 days.

As for whether the we should have had Hirohito renounce his divinity, it is just talk. He was never divine. Those who wished to think of him as divine could have still done so. It was a nonsensical belief, but, as you say, their right to believe it. It they wished to, they still could. So, perhaps, we liberated them.
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 05-02-2009, 10:31 PM
Bones's Avatar
Nobility
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Laredo, United States
Posts: 455
The Plan of Iguala called for independence, not continued Spanish rule. If that there the case there would have been no point to it. He did at first want to remain under the Spanish crown but the country would have been no less independent that Canada or Australia is today. But that is beside the point; that didn't happen. Iturbide became Emperor and he was nobody's puppet, he was not supported by any European powers and the King of Spain was adamantly opposed to the whole enterprise. If Maximilian was a French puppet why didn't he run away when the French left? Why didn't he turn over Sonora when the French wanted it? Why did he adopt a Mexican as his heir and not a French prince or aristocrat?

What little Carter did for the Shah after his overthrow is neither here nor there. Yes I'm sure the Empress is biased but don't you think American accounts might be too? The fact remains that while he was still in power he asked for American help to deal with the Islamic fundamentalists and it was refused and when he wanted to take action against them the US told him not to and promised to work something out.

You say the Japanese Emperor was never divine, fine, I don't think so either but that is not your call or my call to make. Frankly it seems a little insulting imho. I wouldn't like someone to say that about Jesus even though they have every right to believe as they choose. And it is not so simple as the Japanese choosing what they want to believe. The US forced Hirohito to publically renounce his divinity -which would make it rather hard for any Japanese traditionalists to go in believing in him in that way. Call it liberation if you like, if you don't believe in State Shinto it certainly would be, but I don't think it was any business of the USA. If a foreign power invaded my country and said Christianity was banned they might think they liberating the people but that still wouldn't make it right.
__________________
"Oh, God, I could be bounded in a nutshell, and count myself a king of infinite space, were it not that I have bad dreams".
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 05-04-2009, 12:54 PM
Al_bina's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: City, Kazakhstan
Posts: 7,950
It is rather entertaining to read a discussion. Japan lost the World War II. It was victors, who wrote the history, established rules, and carried out punishments. Americans attempted to modify Emperor Hirohitos's image and role to suit their immediate agenda. I dare to say that Americans did not have many viable options to replace the Emperor with because he was a more spiritual nucleus that held the nation together and a personification of stability in the trying times. Japan proved capable of reinventing itself and claiming far more important victories in the socio-economic sphere in the long run.
__________________
"I never did mind about the little things"
Amanda, "Point of No Return"
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 05-08-2009, 03:29 AM
Commoner
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: tokyo, Japan
Posts: 19
ppl stopped to fighting because tenno said to stop.
in the chinese continental, some of Imperial family were sent with Emperor's massages to stop.
in Sakhalin, The tragedy occurred for that because Epmperor said to surrender.
History News Network
anyway It might be the same situation as Iraq if there was no emperor.
Shumshu - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

BTW、Who could kick out hirohito?
Allied Forces did ugly propagandas to Japanese citizen to abolish Tenno system. however no one was moved..
if someone did so, it would be called an enemy of the court..
nobody wants to be an enemy of the court, Choteki
It is the most disgrace for the Japanese.
Reply With Quote
  #31  
Old 11-17-2009, 05:30 AM
Prince of Chota's Avatar
Courtier
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Neuilly, France
Posts: 514
I think it's safe to say that there was very bad blood between the Chinese and Japanese at the end of the war; the sentiment is still felt around China to this day. So it's rather difficult to imagine a situation where Japan would have been swept up in the wave of Maoism that swept the warlords out of mainland China, I doubt that the communists in China could have accomplished it. They had enough trouble getting all of the mainland under the same banner, let alone the massive Japanese population. And having lived in China for a time, I can't say that the Maoist form of communism is the worst government one could be stuck with.
I do think that people today don't understand how unifying a monarchy actually is. It's something I always heard from my grandparents' generation, who remember the war and how powerful the royal family (in our case George VI and Elizabeth Bowes-Lyon) were in maintaining national unity and morale.
We also should decide if we're talking about a general abolition of the Japanese monarchy, or physically removing the imperial family from the country (in which case they'd probably just be living in exile in Europe--maybe Belgium like the Korean Shin de Pyongsans?)
Yes, President Carter didn't do much for the Shah (is Carter little?), but I don't see how Maximilian of Habsburg (or Mexico if you recognize that) is relevant. The Mexican people and their elected government were hardly happy with the idea of a foreign-imposed monarch, even if he was supported by the ethnically-European (Criollo) aristocracy of the country. The scenario is completely different: the monarch in question isn't indigenous (Maximilian wasn't a Tlatoani or Caltzontzin as Hirohito was a Tenno), and the reason for his removal wasn't an invading foreign power (instead, the foreign support that was his powerbase had disappeared). For the sake of fairness, Maximilian wasn't the puppet that Napoleon III had hoped he'd be. But, unfortunately for him, Maximilian wasn't Mexican.
I agree completely with Bones about the issue of State Shinto. Every culture is entitled to its own beliefs, and one could easily make the argument that the concept of the "American Dream" is their own form of state religion. It isn't appropriate to say that Japan isn't a religious nation today, just that Japanese and other Eastern religions do not manifest themselves the same way that the Western religions do. My experience in East Asia is that these are in fact very religiously faithful cultures. However, there isn't the need that Westerners have to maintain ties and identify with one religion alone. Japanese often use Christianity for (western style) weddings, Buddhism for funerals, and Shintoism for the major markers of life (first day of school, birth of children, etc). The attempt by the United States to stomp out State Shintoism made sense at the time, but from some distance appears to conform to a larger trend of cultural misunderstanding and colonialist tendencies.
Reply With Quote
  #32  
Old 03-12-2019, 07:41 AM
Commoner
 
Join Date: Nov 2018
Location: Deltona, United States
Posts: 13
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mandy View Post
Because the emperor was highly revered in Japan, the USA kept Hirohito as a figurehead to control the masses and prevent anarchy. I doubt very much that Japan would be just another country minus one monarch. As you see, Britain demanded that Hiroito be tried for war crimes, but the USA refused knowing full well the dangers involved in prosecuting an emperor since emperors had been revered like gods for centuries. It would have ensured the occupation's failure.
Why can't Hiroito be charged with war crime but the Japanese Monarchy be perserved. The Allies could remove him and Put his son of brother on the throne.
Reply With Quote
  #33  
Old 03-12-2019, 09:38 AM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: St Thomas, U.S. Minor Outlying Islands
Posts: 1,404
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lunawalk View Post
Why can't Hiroito be charged with war crime but the Japanese Monarchy be perserved. The Allies could remove him and Put his son of brother on the throne.
I seem to recall reading (though I cannot remember the source) that those suggestions were also put forth, before General MacArthur made the choice to retain Hirohito believing the revered emperor would be a key figure in winning over the Japanese people.
Reply With Quote
  #34  
Old 03-12-2019, 11:59 AM
Commoner
 
Join Date: Dec 2018
Location: Durham, United States
Posts: 24
Best book on subject is Herbert Bix's "Hirohito and the Making of Modern Japan." The author made use of documents that had been previously inaccessible. Not an easy read for "history lite" afficionados. The emperor does not at all come off as the petite sweet-faced man with a high-pitched voice that was presented to the world after 1945, but as an unrelenting warmongerer right up to the time of Japan's surrender.
Reply With Quote
  #35  
Old 03-12-2019, 12:30 PM
Muhler's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Eastern Jutland, Denmark
Posts: 12,163
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tatiana Maria View Post
I seem to recall reading (though I cannot remember the source) that those suggestions were also put forth, before General MacArthur made the choice to retain Hirohito believing the revered emperor would be a key figure in winning over the Japanese people.
Agree, an emperor put in by the Allies would be seen as a puppet figure and that would undermine the whole institution of the monarchy.
Certainly at the time the Japanese culture (basically since for ever!) was authoritarian. The Japanese were used to and instilled with the notion of there would always be someone to tell them what to do. (And think!) - Or just as importantly had the authority to tell them what to do by someone acting on behalf of a semi-divine person, the emperor. Provided that person was (is) Japanese of course.
There was always the fear that the Japanese in the tumultuous times after the monarchy being abolished or undermined "by foreign barbarians" would start to do what Stalin wanted them to do! - Stalin also being - in the right light - a semi-divine figure.

It is fascinating to speculate how warlike Emperor Hirorito really was. But after the war it was certainly in everyone's interest to portray him as a peaceful, compromise-seeking person, regardless as to whether that was true or not.
That applied to the vanquished Japanese in general and the Japanese nationalists and general McArthur in particular.

McArthur was Japan's last Shogun. - Replacing the previous one, Tojo, who was toppled and put under arrest by the Allies in 1945.
So Hirohito, who no doubt also knew his history, would not have been that unfamiliar with the political circumstances post August 1945.
Reply With Quote
  #36  
Old 03-12-2019, 01:27 PM
Ista's Avatar
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Feb 2018
Location: the West, United States
Posts: 1,449
Quote:
Originally Posted by Addapalla View Post
Best book on subject is Herbert Bix's "Hirohito and the Making of Modern Japan." The author made use of documents that had been previously inaccessible. Not an easy read for "history lite" afficionados. The emperor does not at all come off as the petite sweet-faced man with a high-pitched voice that was presented to the world after 1945, but as an unrelenting warmongerer right up to the time of Japan's surrender.
The Bix book was certainly a fascinating read, and presents, as you said, a very different view of Hirohito than the propaganda tinged history we've been presented with over the last 70 years. However, like all histories, the author has a certain viewpoint, and is best read with a little bit of skepticism. It is a wonderful book, though.
Reply With Quote
  #37  
Old 03-12-2019, 02:02 PM
Commoner
 
Join Date: Nov 2018
Location: Deltona, United States
Posts: 13
Quote:
Originally Posted by Muhler View Post
Agree, an emperor put in by the Allies would be seen as a puppet figure and that would undermine the whole institution of the monarchy.
Certainly at the time the Japanese culture (basically since for ever!) was authoritarian. The Japanese were used to and instilled with the notion of there would always be someone to tell them what to do. (And think!) - Or just as importantly had the authority to tell them what to do by someone acting on behalf of a semi-divine person, the emperor. Provided that person was (is) Japanese of course.
There was always the fear that the Japanese in the tumultuous times after the monarchy being abolished or undermined "by foreign barbarians" would start to do what Stalin wanted them to do! - Stalin also being - in the right light - a semi-divine figure.

It is fascinating to speculate how warlike Emperor Hirorito really was. But after the war it was certainly in everyone's interest to portray him as a peaceful, compromise-seeking person, regardless as to whether that was true or not.
That applied to the vanquished Japanese in general and the Japanese nationalists and general McArthur in particular.

McArthur was Japan's last Shogun. - Replacing the previous one, Tojo, who was toppled and put under arrest by the Allies in 1945.
So Hirohito, who no doubt also knew his history, would not have been that unfamiliar with the political circumstances post August 1945.
Demanding the Emperor renounce his divinity the allies were showing he was a puppet. Japan lost it's sovernity with the surrender. I sure he know and approved of the Japanese war crimes. They could have removed and put him on trial. But keeping the monarchy.
Reply With Quote
  #38  
Old 03-12-2019, 03:57 PM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 4,089
How could they keep the Monarchy if they interfered to that extent and put the Emperor on trial for war crimes? It would have alienated the Japanese people...
Reply With Quote
  #39  
Old 03-12-2019, 04:26 PM
Commoner
 
Join Date: Nov 2018
Location: Deltona, United States
Posts: 13
Quote:
Originally Posted by Denville View Post
How could they keep the Monarchy if they interfered to that extent and put the Emperor on trial for war crimes? It would have alienated the Japanese people...
They interfered to make the Emperor give his divinity. That upset some Japanese. Those crimes were horrible and demanded justice.
Reply With Quote
  #40  
Old 03-12-2019, 04:34 PM
Muhler's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Eastern Jutland, Denmark
Posts: 12,163
Political necessity often trumps justice.
Very often actually.

And we must keep in mind that since there has been no judiciary investigation that I know of about Emperor Hirohito's role prior to and during WWII, we don't know if he was:
A) Pro nationalism, including expansion of the Japanese Empire.
B) Maintained the traditionalist political neutral role of the post 1857 emperors.
C) Was kept out of influence, and only exercised what direct influence he had, towards the very end. (The shogunate emperor.)
D) Was politically naive, like so many of his subjects, and hailed the Japanese accomplishments while willfully closing his eyes, for atrocities.
Until he, like his people, began to feel the consequences by late 1943.
__________________

Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
emperor hirohito, emperor showa, history, japanese imperial family, japanese royal family


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
What if things had been different? Alternate History Duchess The Prince of Wales and the Duchess of Cornwall 79 05-09-2016 02:38 AM
If the czar had stayed in power past 1917 would he have been forced out by the nazis Benedict XVI The Imperial Family of Russia 35 02-05-2012 11:33 AM




Popular Tags
administrator archie mountbatten-windsor aristocracy bavaria;house;chef;luitpold;ludwig belgian british royal family ceremony christian ix clothes corruption countess of wessex crown prince hussein crown prince hussein's future wife current events cypher daughter daughters de belgique denmark duchessofcambridge duchess of sussex duke of cambridge duke of sussex duke of york family search french royalty friendly city germany gordon greece harry head of the house her children infanta cristina introduction jack brooksbank juan carlos kiko king meghan markle modernization monarchist monarchy monogram patron prince harry prince laurent princenapoleon princess anne princesses princess louise princess of belgium public image rania of jordan remarriage royal royal ladies sarah duchess of york saxony siblings south africa state visit the crown titles uk styles trump valois van belgië viscount severn windsor castle ww1



Copyright 2002- Social Knowledge, LLC All Rights Reserved.

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 10:05 AM.

Social Knowledge Networks

eXTReMe Tracker
Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2019
Jelsoft Enterprises