what would have happened if the emperor was kicked out after WWII?

[KathyMoore]

what would have happened if the emperor was kicked out after WWII?

were there ever any debates about keeping or abolishing the emperor?
(either among the Japanese people or the US military/govt)

thanks!

[Elspeth]

I think it might have been much easier for Japan to follow so many of the other countries of southeast Asia into Communism. I gather the Chinese were trying to orchestrate a Communist takeover of the Japanese government; the strong feelings of many Japanese in favour of their Emperor may have been part of why the takeover wasn't successful.

[EmpressRouge]

Hirohito was not tried for war crimes, and the Japanese were allowed to keep their emperor but there were conditions the most significant of which was a declaration that he was no longer divine. Even that drove some Japanese to suicide.

[Elspeth]

Elizabeth Gray Vining's book about her time as tutor to the current emperor when he was a boy talks about the conditions in Japan in the immediate postwar period, and it sounded absolutely dire. That sort of deprivation and societal breakdown are often precursors to anarchy or revolution. I'm sure the existence of the imperial family was a stabilising influence even with the occupation-imposed changes to their scope and size.

[Toledo]

Originally Posted by KathyMoore

what would have happened if the emperor was kicked out after WWII?
were there ever any debates about keeping or abolishing the emperor?
(either among the Japanese people or the US military/govt)

thanks!

That sounds like a great topic for one of those alternate history fiction books. My wild guess is that life would be just like it is now...minus one monarch.

[Mandy]

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.

[Lady Jennifer]

This is an interesting topic. Gotta love the "what if" questions in life.

Originally Posted by Mandy

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.

Its good to see that they thought ahead & knew something like that could possibly happen. I guess in a way they thought it might cause another Hitler- like figure to rise to power if they had removed the Emperor?

[Vanesa]

I, for one, doesn't like the words "kicked out" for a serious history thread. And of course, you know that I'm against Republics in general , so I think that the best of all things is always conserve the Monarchs, who are the symbol of the historical and cultural roots of a Nation.

I agree that without an Emperor, Japan could have been quite easily pushed to Communism, or at least to a social war, which is always dangerous.

But again...Only Japanese could decide which kind og governement they wants to have and which rules should rule them. I think that no country (nor coalition of countries) must have any right to decide any political internal issue of a foreign State. "Progress" and "correct political ways" spread too much blood in our poor little world.

Vanesa.