Now I don’t know what portion of the German population is blond and blue-eyed, but I don’t believe it’s a majority. That was the Aryan ideal, but it wasn’t the norm.

As for mustering up sympathy for the Japanese people–I can muster plenty for all of the patriotic Japanese Americans who were put in internment camps in this country simply because of their race. This was the fallout of the racism that the war spawned–a consequence off all those negative depictions.

And I can muster plenty of sympathy for all the wars victims, civilians and soldiers alike. It’s important not to confuse the people that are fighting the war for the policy that motivates it. Most of the soldiers who faught in the war on both sides were too young and too nieve and too driven by the furor of populist sentiment to grasp the ultimate consequences of the conflict.

I think we’re all responsible for war, and there are many factors that contribute to war, the principal two being religion and economics. Germany was at a very weak moral moment in it’s history after WW1. It was an economically depressed society that found it’s scapegoat in the Jews. These conditions were somewhat mirrored in Japan and Italy.

I don’t think the war was a product of some sort of comic book malevolence—the Axis was not a faceless villain. Their were molevolent acts committed, and molevolent men were behind it, but what spurred it was something a little more complicated. So no, I don’t think the Germans and the Itallians and the Japanese were bad guys. That’s too easy.

Now I don’t know what portion of the German population is blond and blue-eyed, but I don’t believe it’s a majority. That was the Aryan ideal, but it wasn’t the norm.

As for mustering up sympathy for the Japanese people–I can muster plenty for all of the patriotic Japanese Americans who were put in internment camps in this country simply because of their race. This was the fallout of the racism that the war spawned–a consequence off all those negative depictions.

And I can muster plenty of sympathy for all the wars victims, civilians and soldiers alike. It’s important not to confuse the people that are fighting the war for the policy that motivates it. Most of the soldiers who faught in the war on both sides were too young and too nieve and too driven by the furor of populist sentiment to grasp the ultimate consequences of the conflict.

I think we’re all responsible for war, and there are many factors that contribute to war, the principal two being religion and economics. Germany was at a very weak moral moment in it’s history after WW1. It was an economically depressed society that found it’s scapegoat in the Jews. These conditions were somewhat mirrored in Japan and Italy.

I don’t think the war was a product of some sort of comic book malevolence—the Axis was not a faceless villain. Their were molevolent acts committed, and molevolent men were behind it, but what spurred it was something a little more complicated. So no, I don’t think the Germans and the Itallians and the Japanese were bad guys. That’s too easy.

Certainly the Japanese suffered, as did those of German descent – virtually anyone who was perceived as an enemy of the Allies. Is it right? No. Unfortunately a broad brush is applied in times where clear distinctions must be drawn. Much of the public’s perception during this time was either black or white – there was little or no grey area. It’s difficult to muster up a lot of sympathy for people that are going for a massive land grab grab throughout Europe, Africa and the Far East. Throw in a plan to exterminate an entire race of people, and those would appear to me to be the prime candidates for the “Bad Guy” label.

That the Japanese were “enemies” in World War II because of their race – well, that’s just wrong. Were we at war with the Germans because they were primarily a blonde, blue-eyed people? Were we fighting the Italians because their language is different than English? Certainly to fight them for just those reasons would be unbelievably racist – but those are no more the reasons we fought them them than to say we fought the Japanese because they were a different race.

It would be a wonderful thing to ask Sam Cobean how he feels about it, lo, these many years later. It would be interesting to ask him if he felt any differently about what he did during that time, and why or why not. My guess is, he might feel that at the time it was perfectly justified as he helped what he considered “the right side” to win. He might say but it’s over 60 years later it’s a different day, and it’s time to put that behind us and recognize it for what it was and is – wartime propaganda and not a reflection of where we are now.

Certainly the Japanese suffered, as did those of German descent – virtually anyone who was perceived as an enemy of the Allies. Is it right? No. Unfortunately a broad brush is applied in times where clear distinctions must be drawn. Much of the public’s perception during this time was either black or white – there was little or no grey area. It’s difficult to muster up a lot of sympathy for people that are going for a massive land grab grab throughout Europe, Africa and the Far East. Throw in a plan to exterminate an entire race of people, and those would appear to me to be the prime candidates for the “Bad Guy” label.

That the Japanese were “enemies” in World War II because of their race – well, that’s just wrong. Were we at war with the Germans because they were primarily a blonde, blue-eyed people? Were we fighting the Italians because their language is different than English? Certainly to fight them for just those reasons would be unbelievably racist – but those are no more the reasons we fought them them than to say we fought the Japanese because they were a different race.

It would be a wonderful thing to ask Sam Cobean how he feels about it, lo, these many years later. It would be interesting to ask him if he felt any differently about what he did during that time, and why or why not. My guess is, he might feel that at the time it was perfectly justified as he helped what he considered “the right side” to win. He might say but it’s over 60 years later it’s a different day, and it’s time to put that behind us and recognize it for what it was and is – wartime propaganda and not a reflection of where we are now.

As for US depictions of the Japanese– I’m not talking exclusively about stuff like this specifically created for the war, but every aspect of our media at the time. All I really wanted to point out is the U.S.’s behavior and its consequences without entering too much into the realm of relativism, because I do think we need to take responsibility for what we DID do, and we DID single the Japanese out because they were non-whites.

It does seem like any criticism of our behavior during WW2 is anathema, and I do consider the climate of the time, but that doesn’t justify every action we made. I simply don’t consider it the “good war”. All wars are bad wars and make us behave in ugly ways. Rather than discount that ugliness because, well, it was a war and tensions were high, I think it’s useful to give our behavior a more objective look.

I don’t think there are only two sides to this argument. I don’t think it’s “it was a time of war, so it was ok, and look what the bad guys did” vs. “we’re assholes”. I think it’s more in the realm of: what exactly did we do and what compelled us to do it? And if it was unjust (and I don’t go by the argument that all is just for a righteous cause) then lets look at that too. And yes, we did a lot of good as well, and that’s also worth evaluating. But that doesn’t discount the bad stuff.

As for US depictions of the Japanese– I’m not talking exclusively about stuff like this specifically created for the war, but every aspect of our media at the time. All I really wanted to point out is the U.S.’s behavior and its consequences without entering too much into the realm of relativism, because I do think we need to take responsibility for what we DID do, and we DID single the Japanese out because they were non-whites.

It does seem like any criticism of our behavior during WW2 is anathema, and I do consider the climate of the time, but that doesn’t justify every action we made. I simply don’t consider it the “good war”. All wars are bad wars and make us behave in ugly ways. Rather than discount that ugliness because, well, it was a war and tensions were high, I think it’s useful to give our behavior a more objective look.

I don’t think there are only two sides to this argument. I don’t think it’s “it was a time of war, so it was ok, and look what the bad guys did” vs. “we’re assholes”. I think it’s more in the realm of: what exactly did we do and what compelled us to do it? And if it was unjust (and I don’t go by the argument that all is just for a righteous cause) then lets look at that too. And yes, we did a lot of good as well, and that’s also worth evaluating. But that doesn’t discount the bad stuff.