Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Bushido: Way of Total Bullshit

tofugu.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 210 posts

Re: Bushido: Way of Total Bullshit

#21

Post by mathattack »

iwontreddit wrote: post #17
danso wrote: post #2

If the concept of Bushido didn't become popular until Japan's modernization (at the end of the 19th century)...how much of Japan's conduct in WW2 (notably, the fighting until death) can be attributed/blamed to this misinterpretation of samurai history? Looking at the Wikipedia entry for Kamikaze [1], I was surprised to read that the concept of suicide attacks only became formalized late in the war (June 1944), rather…

> how much of Japan's conduct in WW2 (notably, the fighting until death) can be attributed/blamed to this misinterpretation of samurai history? Japanese soldiers' "fighting to the death" nonsense was myth invented many years after WW2 by allied "historians" to justify the mass murder of japanese soldiers by the allies. It's not that the japanese weren't willing to surrender. It was that the allies ( unfortunately out…

Really no good side in most wars. Winning wars requires evil in one form or another.

Re: Bushido: Way of Total Bullshit

#22

Post by Apocryphon »

iwontreddit wrote: post #17
danso wrote: post #2

If the concept of Bushido didn't become popular until Japan's modernization (at the end of the 19th century)...how much of Japan's conduct in WW2 (notably, the fighting until death) can be attributed/blamed to this misinterpretation of samurai history? Looking at the Wikipedia entry for Kamikaze [1], I was surprised to read that the concept of suicide attacks only became formalized late in the war (June 1944), rather…

> how much of Japan's conduct in WW2 (notably, the fighting until death) can be attributed/blamed to this misinterpretation of samurai history? Japanese soldiers' "fighting to the death" nonsense was myth invented many years after WW2 by allied "historians" to justify the mass murder of japanese soldiers by the allies. It's not that the japanese weren't willing to surrender. It was that the allies ( unfortunately out…

Who was responsible for the mass suicides in the Battle of Okinawa?

Re: Bushido: Way of Total Bullshit

#24

Post by ekianjo »

danso wrote: post #2

If the concept of Bushido didn't become popular until Japan's modernization (at the end of the 19th century)...how much of Japan's conduct in WW2 (notably, the fighting until death) can be attributed/blamed to this misinterpretation of samurai history? Looking at the Wikipedia entry for Kamikaze [1], I was surprised to read that the concept of suicide attacks only became formalized late in the war (June 1944), rather…

> Looking at the Wikipedia entry for Kamikaze [1], I was surprised to read that the concept of suicide attacks only became formalized late in the war (June 1944), rather than something ingrained in the Imperial Japanese fleet from even before the start of conflict.

You don't lose planes for fun.

Re: Bushido: Way of Total Bullshit

#25

Post by Kostchei »

hoodoof wrote: post #4

Related but at a tangent - after a lifetime of interest in karate I came to realise that most of the stuff taught at karate is not practical. Katas and karate punches and kicks - most of this better thought of more as dancing or ceremonial. A bit like Tai Chi - except that Tai Chi claims no real world martial value. The myth remains however of karate being great self defence training. Our local karate club is packed…

I've done some form of boxing, grappling /judo or martial art for 30 years. I taught physical skills- use of force, to law enforcement for 6 years. For 5 years I worked in a violent custodial environment. Some young people entering that work-place had never faced an angry man, never been in a real fight. For them that "martial arts" environment is a reasonably safe and accessible place to start. I agree that it is no substitute for actual combat/use of force training but I wished some of them had at least gone to the local Y or a regular basis. The 6 month "entry to service" training was not sufficient, nor was 3 days a year skill updates. Perhaps the biggest issue with "martial arts" is the misunderstanding some people arrive at they can start a fight and win, and not get hurt. That their theoretical skills will enable them to prevail without pain. That is dangerous and un-helpful.

Re: Bushido: Way of Total Bullshit

#26

Post by ekianjo »

iwontreddit wrote: post #17
danso wrote: post #2

If the concept of Bushido didn't become popular until Japan's modernization (at the end of the 19th century)...how much of Japan's conduct in WW2 (notably, the fighting until death) can be attributed/blamed to this misinterpretation of samurai history? Looking at the Wikipedia entry for Kamikaze [1], I was surprised to read that the concept of suicide attacks only became formalized late in the war (June 1944), rather…

> how much of Japan's conduct in WW2 (notably, the fighting until death) can be attributed/blamed to this misinterpretation of samurai history? Japanese soldiers' "fighting to the death" nonsense was myth invented many years after WW2 by allied "historians" to justify the mass murder of japanese soldiers by the allies. It's not that the japanese weren't willing to surrender. It was that the allies ( unfortunately out…

> The more you learn about the real nature of ww2, you realize that there was no good side in that war. Just two evils fighting each other.

You don't win wars without killing people, and therefore all sides are evil by definition.

The little process of judging "war criminals" after the war is over is just for one's good conscience. If the Allies had lost they would have been judged as war criminals by the victors too.

Re: Bushido: Way of Total Bullshit

#27

Post by ekianjo »

cyberferret wrote: post #12

Interesting that the author mentions that the term "Bushido" wasn't really a thing until last century. I was sure I saw the term mentioned in the writing of Miyamoto Musashi, but I assume that might have been a modern translators interpretation. (I read the English version, not the native Japanese one). Also, some of my favourite graphic novels by Stan Sakai, Kazuo Koike and Goseki Kojima seem to mention the term too…

> Interesting that the author mentions that the term "Bushido" wasn't really a thing until last century. I was sure I saw the term mentioned in the writing of Miyamoto Musashi, but I assume that might have been a modern translators interpretation. (I read the English version, not the native Japanese one).

I'm not sure about the author level of Japanese, but when he said that the term "bushido" was not used but the terms "bushi no michi" existed before, well it's the exact same thing. 武士道　is bushido and 武士の道 is bushi no michi. The exact same writing, but a slightly different expression. It can't be that far off of a concept.

Re: Bushido: Way of Total Bullshit

#28

Post by jbooth »

iwontreddit wrote: post #17
danso wrote: post #2

If the concept of Bushido didn't become popular until Japan's modernization (at the end of the 19th century)...how much of Japan's conduct in WW2 (notably, the fighting until death) can be attributed/blamed to this misinterpretation of samurai history? Looking at the Wikipedia entry for Kamikaze [1], I was surprised to read that the concept of suicide attacks only became formalized late in the war (June 1944), rather…

> how much of Japan's conduct in WW2 (notably, the fighting until death) can be attributed/blamed to this misinterpretation of samurai history? Japanese soldiers' "fighting to the death" nonsense was myth invented many years after WW2 by allied "historians" to justify the mass murder of japanese soldiers by the allies. It's not that the japanese weren't willing to surrender. It was that the allies ( unfortunately out…

Respectfully, that's a bullshit point of view.

For the japanese military in WWII, rape was normal. Butchering civilian populations wholesale was normal. The Americans and British did not play by those rules, even though we did a lot of killing. This was not two equivalent evils.

http://foxtalk.tistory.com/98

Re: Bushido: Way of Total Bullshit

#29

Post by titanix2 »

I recently (3 months) started iaidô[1] in my Japanese university club, and one thing that struck me was how few "bullshit" talks we had about the discipline. In contrast, when browsing for clubs in my country, each website was filled with a last a few paragraphs saying how spiritual the art is, how it is all about discovering yourself and the truth of the universe.

People of my club are more interested in it because katana are cool than the bushidô spirit or something -- basically nobody ever talked about it. Anyway, when everybody train I cannot help to feel the underlying military spirit of the it, and how in a society like Japan it can quickly turn the way it turned in WWII.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iaido

Re: Bushido: Way of Total Bullshit

#30

Post by hoodoof »

Kostchei wrote: post #25
hoodoof wrote: post #4

Related but at a tangent - after a lifetime of interest in karate I came to realise that most of the stuff taught at karate is not practical. Katas and karate punches and kicks - most of this better thought of more as dancing or ceremonial. A bit like Tai Chi - except that Tai Chi claims no real world martial value. The myth remains however of karate being great self defence training. Our local karate club is packed…

I've done some form of boxing, grappling /judo or martial art for 30 years. I taught physical skills- use of force, to law enforcement for 6 years. For 5 years I worked in a violent custodial environment. Some young people entering that work-place had never faced an angry man, never been in a real fight. For them that "martial arts" environment is a reasonably safe and accessible place to start. I agree that it is no…

Boxing, judo, grappling and wrestling all are more practical than karate.

The core issue with karate is that it is loaded with formal or ritualistic representations of fighting. Karate kicks, punches and blocks are all hopelessly unusable when fighting a boxer for example, who is trained to defend their head and hit their opponents head hard and fast. By contrast, few, if any, karate stances are explicitly defending the head from being hit. The more extreme examples include holding the fist at the hip - a truly useless place for a fist to be during a fight.

Post reply on HN