FREE ESSAY ON EMBRACING DEFEAT

EMBRACING DEFEAT

John Dower's "Embracing Defeat" truly conveys the Japanese experience of American
occupation from within by focusing on the social, cultural, and philosophical aspects of
a country devastated by World War II. His capturing of the Japanese peoples' voice let
us, as readers, empathize with those who had to start over in a "new nation." 
The initial terms of surrender were laid out in the Potsdam Declaration of July 26, 1945,
in which the United States, Great Britain, and China all participated. But unlike post
World War II Germany, which was split into four quadrants among the Allies, the
occupation of Japan was solely and American endeavor. This document was by no means tame.
Military occupation would see to it that its measure would be properly carried out.
Justice would be served to those "who deceived and misled the people of Japan into
embarking on world conquest," Disarmament of the military, reparations as the Allies saw
fit, and the "remove all obstacles to the revival and strengthening of democratic
tendencies among the Japanese people" were also to be enacted. At the head of this
revolution, as spelled out in Potsdam, was Douglas MacArthur. 
General Douglas MacArthur, the Supreme Commander of the Allied Power (otherwise known as
SCAP), from day one became, except in name, dictator of Japan. No aspect of the Japanese
nation was untouched, with special attention directed to the areas military, government,
and the economy. While most revolutions throughout history have emanated from below,
starting from the people, the social and political changes forthcoming was truly a
"revolution from above." Within a month of landing numerous measures were enacted, either
to dissolve existing laws or to create new ones. The "thought police" of the Home
Ministry was done away with, as was the Peace Preservation Law of 1925, in which
thousands of government critics were imprisoned. Purges of militaristic, high ranking
officials occurred, as was the ban on restriction of assembly and speech. Yet, while
political change happened with lightning like swiftness, social change was much slower.
Upon arriving to the mainland of Japan, many of the American occupation were stunned at
the utter devastation that the Japanese had endured. It was a testament to both the
bravery and spirit of their armies, as well as the foolishness of their leaders, that
they were able to endure the war as long as they had. Having put most of their economic
resources to the war movement, much of the civilian population was left in near famine.
With the armies throughout the Pacific being repatriated on a daily basis (although many
wouldn't return for year) the conditions became even worse. Despair and hunger set into
the populace that was described as the "kyodatsu condition." With their colonies in Asia
no longer in direct control, much of their food supply imports were cut off. Japan had
relied heavily upon the importation of rice, sugar, and salt, but access was now severely
restricted. To make matters worse, the United States decided to take a hands-off approach
to rebuild the economy, a natural decision to punish a nation that caused so much
devastation to others. Malnutrition was a leading cause of preventable death in many
major cities, and the rapid rise of inflation throughout Japan left the yen almost
worthless. While black markets flourished, many civilians who depended upon them arrested
for buying from them. The following four years after Japan's surrender each saw an excess
of over 1 million people imprisoned for black market transactions. Crime ran rampant, and
many of these conditions wouldn't return to pre-war levels until 1949.
Maybe the most controversial topic regarding punishment to those responsible for the
Pacific War was the decision to maintain the role of emperor, along with Hirohito, who
had occupied the position since 1926. The status of emperor is truly unique to Western
thought, for Hirohito laid claim to being a direct descendent of the sun goddess,
Amaterasu. Much of the fanatical behavior of Japanese soldiers lay in the fact that "the
way of the subject is to be loyal to the Emperor in disregard of self, thereby supporting
the Imperial Throne coextensive with the Heavens and with the Earth." With his support,
much like Ayatollah Khoemeni , the Pacific War was raised to the level of the Islamic
jihad, or "holy war." While many within the states called for his indictment on war
crimes, General MacArthur saw to it that his role in Japan's aggression was never really
questioned. 
While it's certain that MacArthur exaggerated the difficulty that would encompass the
removal of the emperor, his logic in keeping Hirohito in place was sound: with a familiar
figurehead in place, Hirohito would be used as a new symbol of democracy and peace by the
U.S. Separating from the state the Shinto religion, and ridding Japan of the imperial
government, MacArthur would use Hirohito as a measure of control. One of the demands
required of him, though, was the infamous "Declaration of Humanity" that occurred on New
Years Day, 1946. In the final revision Hirohito, while claiming to not have been a "god"
in a sense, never denied that he was a descendent of the sun goddess as set forth by the
Meiji constitution of 1868. 
While Hirohito was being exonerated of war crimes, guilt was place on a relatively small
group of Japanese leaders. With the Nuremberg Trials as its only precedent, the Tokyo
war-crime trials expanded the rules of what was and wasn't acceptable in war. As put
forth by the Potsdam Declaration, "stern justice shall be meted out to all war criminals,
including those who have visited cruelties upon our prisoners." 
What was so disturbing about these proceedings was the precedent it set forth for future
figures of authority. Countries that may way war in the future, whether of defensive
nature or acts of aggression, could face dire consequences if on the losing side. Victors
could make up the rules as they went, and the defendants could be tried for crimes that
may never have been previously established by international law. At the same time, racism
seemed to play a large part in the proceedings. Much of this had to do with the facts
that over 25 percent of American and British soldiers were estimated to have died while
captives of the Japanese, compared to 4 percent in Germany. In very un-American fashion,
the tribunal required only a majority vote to find the defendants guilty, and the rules
of evidence were relaxed a great deal, allowing for the admission of hearsay. With such a
stacked deck, very few stood a chance of acquittal, but to the end almost all shielded
Hirohito from blame. 
Another serious aspect of the "winner takes all" mentality that occurred during the Tokyo
trial was the obvious double standard of justice that the Allies exuded. Nothing ever
became of the hundreds of thousand Japanese soldiers who remained under Soviet control,
as well as the questionable use of force the Americans displayed during the last months
of the war. Were the Tokyo fire bombings, as well as the dropping of the atomic bomb on
Hiroshima and Nagasaki, not "crimes against humanity?" If "namely, murder, extermination,
enslavement, deportation, and other inhumane acts committed before or during war" is the
definition, as stated by Article 5 of the Tokyo charter, than surely the U.S. involvement
in the deaths of half a million civilians would fit under this bill. War, though, is
never fair, and "to the victors go the spoils" was never so true with regards to the
Tokyo war crime trial. 
In the end, the American occupation provided much insight into how Japan would be run in
the future. Having learned from their counterpart the importance of science and
technology, it was obvious where Japan had to go to be competitive in the future. While
one of the initial goals of SCAP was to dissolve many of the large zaibatsu conglomerates
that dominated the Japanese economy prior to and during war, most were left standing.
This allowed for a more rapid reconstruction process after occupation had ended. One
ironic twist to all this is that Japan embraced the ideas of management as espoused by an
American, Edward Deming, or order to help rebuild the economy. Consequently, the
occupation, officially terminated in April of 1952, served to firmly plant a substantial
capital of good will that was previously unknown, on which both the United States and
Japan would draw from in the years to come.
John Dower's "Embracing Defeat" truly conveys the Japanese experience of American
occupation from within by focusing on the social, cultural, and philosophical aspects of
a country devastated by World War II. His capturing of the Japanese peoples' voice let
us, as readers, empathize with those who had to start over in a "new nation." 
The initial terms of surrender were laid out in the Potsdam Declaration of July 26, 1945,
in which the United States, Great Britain, and China all participated. But unlike post
World War II Germany, which was split into four quadrants among the Allies, the
occupation of Japan was solely and American endeavor. This document was by no means tame.
Military occupation would see to it that its measure would be properly carried out.
Justice would be served to those "who deceived and misled the people of Japan into
embarking on world conquest," Disarmament of the military, reparations as the Allies saw
fit, and the "remove all obstacles to the revival and strengthening of democratic
tendencies among the Japanese people" were also to be enacted. At the head of this
revolution, as spelled out in Potsdam, was Douglas MacArthur. 
General Douglas MacArthur, the Supreme Commander of the Allied Power (otherwise known as
SCAP), from day one became, except in name, dictator of Japan. No aspect of the Japanese
nation was untouched, with special attention directed to the areas military, government,
and the economy. While most revolutions throughout history have emanated from below,
starting from the people, the social and political changes forthcoming was truly a
"revolution from above." Within a month of landing numerous measures were enacted, either
to dissolve existing laws or to create new ones. The "thought police" of the Home
Ministry was done away with, as was the Peace Preservation Law of 1925, in which
thousands of government critics were imprisoned. Purges of militaristic, high ranking
officials occurred, as was the ban on restriction of assembly and speech. Yet, while
political change happened with lightning like swiftness, social change was much slower.
Upon arriving to the mainland of Japan, many of the American occupation were stunned at
the utter devastation that the Japanese had endured. It was a testament to both the
bravery and spirit of their armies, as well as the foolishness of their leaders, that
they were able to endure the war as long as they had. Having put most of their economic
resources to the war movement, much of the civilian population was left in near famine.
With the armies throughout the Pacific being repatriated on a daily basis (although many
wouldn't return for year) the conditions became even worse. Despair and hunger set into
the populace that was described as the "kyodatsu condition." With their colonies in Asia
no longer in direct control, much of their food supply imports were cut off. Japan had
relied heavily upon the importation of rice, sugar, and salt, but access was now severely
restricted. To make matters worse, the United States decided to take a hands-off approach
to rebuild the economy, a natural decision to punish a nation that caused so much
devastation to others. Malnutrition was a leading cause of preventable death in many
major cities, and the rapid rise of inflation throughout Japan left the yen almost
worthless. While black markets flourished, many civilians who depended upon them arrested
for buying from them. The following four years after Japan's surrender each saw an excess
of over 1 million people imprisoned for black market transactions. Crime ran rampant, and
many of these conditions wouldn't return to pre-war levels until 1949.
Maybe the most controversial topic regarding punishment to those responsible for the
Pacific War was the decision to maintain the role of emperor, along with Hirohito, who
had occupied the position since 1926. The status of emperor is truly unique to Western
thought, for Hirohito laid claim to being a direct descendent of the sun goddess,
Amaterasu. Much of the fanatical behavior of Japanese soldiers lay in the fact that "the
way of the subject is to be loyal to the Emperor in disregard of self, thereby supporting
the Imperial Throne coextensive with the Heavens and with the Earth." With his support,
much like Ayatollah Khoemeni , the Pacific War was raised to the level of the Islamic
jihad, or "holy war." While many within the states called for his indictment on war
crimes, General MacArthur saw to it that his role in Japan's aggression was never really
questioned. 
While it's certain that MacArthur exaggerated the difficulty that would encompass the
removal of the emperor, his logic in keeping Hirohito in place was sound: with a familiar
figurehead in place, Hirohito would be used as a new symbol of democracy and peace by the
U.S. Separating from the state the Shinto religion, and ridding Japan of the imperial
government, MacArthur would use Hirohito as a measure of control. One of the demands
required of him, though, was the infamous "Declaration of Humanity" that occurred on New
Years Day, 1946. In the final revision Hirohito, while claiming to not have been a "god"
in a sense, never denied that he was a descendent of the sun goddess as set forth by the
Meiji constitution of 1868. 
While Hirohito was being exonerated of war crimes, guilt was place on a relatively small
group of Japanese leaders. With the Nuremberg Trials as its only precedent, the Tokyo
war-crime trials expanded the rules of what was and wasn't acceptable in war. As put
forth by the Potsdam Declaration, "stern justice shall be meted out to all war criminals,
including those who have visited cruelties upon our prisoners." 
What was so disturbing about these proceedings was the precedent it set forth for future
figures of authority. Countries that may way war in the future, whether of defensive
nature or acts of aggression, could face dire consequences if on the losing side. Victors
could make up the rules as they went, and the defendants could be tried for crimes that
may never have been previously established by international law. At the same time, racism
seemed to play a large part in the proceedings. Much of this had to do with the facts
that over 25 percent of American and British soldiers were estimated to have died while
captives of the Japanese, compared to 4 percent in Germany. In very un-American fashion,
the tribunal required only a majority vote to find the defendants guilty, and the rules
of evidence were relaxed a great deal, allowing for the admission of hearsay. With such a
stacked deck, very few stood a chance of acquittal, but to the end almost all shielded
Hirohito from blame. 
Another serious aspect of the "winner takes all" mentality that occurred during the Tokyo
trial was the obvious double standard of justice that the Allies exuded. Nothing ever
became of the hundreds of thousand Japanese soldiers who remained under Soviet control,
as well as the questionable use of force the Americans displayed during the last months
of the war. Were the Tokyo fire bombings, as well as the dropping of the atomic bomb on
Hiroshima and Nagasaki, not "crimes against humanity?" If "namely, murder, extermination,
enslavement, deportation, and other inhumane acts committed before or during war" is the
definition, as stated by Article 5 of the Tokyo charter, than surely the U.S. involvement
in the deaths of half a million civilians would fit under this bill. War, though, is
never fair, and "to the victors go the spoils" was never so true with regards to the
Tokyo war crime trial. 
In the end, the American occupation provided much insight into how Japan would be run in
the future. Having learned from their counterpart the importance of science and
technology, it was obvious where Japan had to go to be competitive in the future. While
one of the initial goals of SCAP was to dissolve many of the large zaibatsu conglomerates
that dominated the Japanese economy prior to and during war, most were left standing.
This allowed for a more rapid reconstruction process after occupation had ended. One
ironic twist to all this is that Japan embraced the ideas of management as espoused by an
American, Edward Deming, or order to help rebuild the economy. Consequently, the
occupation, officially terminated in April of 1952, served to firmly plant a substantial
capital of good will that was previously unknown, on which both the United States and
Japan would draw from in the years to come.
John Dower's "Embracing Defeat" truly conveys the Japanese experience of American
occupation from within by focusing on the social, cultural, and philosophical aspects of
a country devastated by World War II. His capturing of the Japanese peoples' voice let
us, as readers, empathize with those who had to start over in a "new nation." 
The initial terms of surrender were laid out in the Potsdam Declaration of July 26, 1945,
in which the United States, Great Britain, and China all participated. But unlike post
World War II Germany, which was split into four quadrants among the Allies, the
occupation of Japan was solely and American endeavor. This document was by no means tame.
Military occupation would see to it that its measure would be properly carried out.
Justice would be served to those "who deceived and misled the people of Japan into
embarking on world conquest," Disarmament of the military, reparations as the Allies saw
fit, and the "remove all obstacles to the revival and strengthening of democratic
tendencies among the Japanese people" were also to be enacted. At the head of this
revolution, as spelled out in Potsdam, was Douglas MacArthur. 
General Douglas MacArthur, the Supreme Commander of the Allied Power (otherwise known as
SCAP), from day one became, except in name, dictator of Japan. No aspect of the Japanese
nation was untouched, with special attention directed to the areas military, government,
and the economy. While most revolutions throughout history have emanated from below,
starting from the people, the social and political changes forthcoming was truly a
"revolution from above." Within a month of landing numerous measures were enacted, either
to dissolve existing laws or to create new ones. The "thought police" of the Home
Ministry was done away with, as was the Peace Preservation Law of 1925, in which
thousands of government critics were imprisoned. Purges of militaristic, high ranking
officials occurred, as was the ban on restriction of assembly and speech. Yet, while
political change happened with lightning like swiftness, social change was much slower.
Upon arriving to the mainland of Japan, many of the American occupation were stunned at
the utter devastation that the Japanese had endured. It was a testament to both the
bravery and spirit of their armies, as well as the foolishness of their leaders, that
they were able to endure the war as long as they had. Having put most of their economic
resources to the war movement, much of the civilian population was left in near famine.
With the armies throughout the Pacific being repatriated on a daily basis (although many
wouldn't return for year) the conditions became even worse. Despair and hunger set into
the populace that was described as the "kyodatsu condition." With their colonies in Asia
no longer in direct control, much of their food supply imports were cut off. Japan had
relied heavily upon the importation of rice, sugar, and salt, but access was now severely
restricted. To make matters worse, the United States decided to take a hands-off approach
to rebuild the economy, a natural decision to punish a nation that caused so much
devastation to others. Malnutrition was a leading cause of preventable death in many
major cities, and the rapid rise of inflation throughout Japan left the yen almost
worthless. While black markets flourished, many civilians who depended upon them arrested
for buying from them. The following four years after Japan's surrender each saw an excess
of over 1 million people imprisoned for black market transactions. Crime ran rampant, and
many of these conditions wouldn't return to pre-war levels until 1949.
Maybe the most controversial topic regarding punishment to those responsible for the
Pacific War was the decision to maintain the role of emperor, along with Hirohito, who
had occupied the position since 1926. The status of emperor is truly unique to Western
thought, for Hirohito laid claim to being a direct descendent of the sun goddess,
Amaterasu. Much of the fanatical behavior of Japanese soldiers lay in the fact that "the
way of the subject is to be loyal to the Emperor in disregard of self, thereby supporting
the Imperial Throne coextensive with the Heavens and with the Earth." With his support,
much like Ayatollah Khoemeni , the Pacific War was raised to the level of the Islamic
jihad, or "holy war." While many within the states called for his indictment on war
crimes, General MacArthur saw to it that his role in Japan's aggression was never really
questioned. 
While it's certain that MacArthur exaggerated the difficulty that would encompass the
removal of the emperor, his logic in keeping Hirohito in place was sound: with a familiar
figurehead in place, Hirohito would be used as a new symbol of democracy and peace by the
U.S. Separating from the state the Shinto religion, and ridding Japan of the imperial
government, MacArthur would use Hirohito as a measure of control. One of the demands
required of him, though, was the infamous "Declaration of Humanity" that occurred on New
Years Day, 1946. In the final revision Hirohito, while claiming to not have been a "god"
in a sense, never denied that he was a descendent of the sun goddess as set forth by the
Meiji constitution of 1868. 
While Hirohito was being exonerated of war crimes, guilt was place on a relatively small
group of Japanese leaders. With the Nuremberg Trials as its only precedent, the Tokyo
war-crime trials expanded the rules of what was and wasn't acceptable in war. As put
forth by the Potsdam Declaration, "stern justice shall be meted out to all war criminals,
including those who have visited cruelties upon our prisoners." 
What was so disturbing about these proceedings was the precedent it set forth for future
figures of authority. Countries that may way war in the future, whether of defensive
nature or acts of aggression, could face dire consequences if on the losing side. Victors
could make up the rules as they went, and the defendants could be tried for crimes that
may never have been previously established by international law. At the same time, racism
seemed to play a large part in the proceedings. Much of this had to do with the facts
that over 25 percent of American and British soldiers were estimated to have died while
captives of the Japanese, compared to 4 percent in Germany. In very un-American fashion,
the tribunal required only a majority vote to find the defendants guilty, and the rules
of evidence were relaxed a great deal, allowing for the admission of hearsay. With such a
stacked deck, very few stood a chance of acquittal, but to the end almost all shielded
Hirohito from blame. 
Another serious aspect of the "winner takes all" mentality that occurred during the Tokyo
trial was the obvious double standard of justice that the Allies exuded. Nothing ever
became of the hundreds of thousand Japanese soldiers who remained under Soviet control,
as well as the questionable use of force the Americans displayed during the last months
of the war. Were the Tokyo fire bombings, as well as the dropping of the atomic bomb on
Hiroshima and Nagasaki, not "crimes against humanity?" If "namely, murder, extermination,
enslavement, deportation, and other inhumane acts committed before or during war" is the
definition, as stated by Article 5 of the Tokyo charter, than surely the U.S. involvement
in the deaths of half a million civilians would fit under this bill. War, though, is
never fair, and "to the victors go the spoils" was never so true with regards to the
Tokyo war crime trial. 
In the end, the American occupation provided much insight into how Japan would be run in
the future. Having learned from their counterpart the importance of science and
technology, it was obvious where Japan had to go to be competitive in the future. While
one of the initial goals of SCAP was to dissolve many of the large zaibatsu conglomerates
that dominated the Japanese economy prior to and during war, most were left standing.
This allowed for a more rapid reconstruction process after occupation had ended. One
ironic twist to all this is that Japan embraced the ideas of management as espoused by an
American, Edward Deming, or order to help rebuild the economy. Consequently, the
occupation, officially terminated in April of 1952, served to firmly plant a substantial
capital of good will that was previously unknown, on which both the United States and
Japan would draw from in the years to come.
Bibliography
Embracing Defeat, John Dower