What happened to change the Japanese Military mindset from 1900 to 1937?

[RubiconDecision]

What's gotten corrupted is the topic, not surprising given other topics on the same thing that within the first ten posts leap off into other areas. And this "focused scholarly historical discussion" that I'm somehow obstructing? Please.

Every samurai had to know the Five Relationships and recite quotes from Confucianism from memory. Could the IJA do that? Of course not! These were no scholars. They were a ragtag bunch of rapists. Any comparison of them to earlier Japanese military figures is utter nonsense. I'd bet that most WW1 and WW2 amateur historian haven't read any Bushido because they'd likely think, "Why would I ever want to read something that resulted in the IJA?". That's how true nonsense gets started! No wonder we get these crazy topics in which people consider the IJA modern day samurai.

What the IJA had was disciplined German based military training. But like all Japanese, hampered by being 5' 4" inches tall wielding a rifle that with its bayonet is as tall as they are. Can you imagine that? What they lacked was any moral center whatsoever.
http://www.militaryfactory.com/small...allarms_id=249

[pannonian]

What's gotten corrupted is the topic, not surprising given other topics on the same thing that within the first ten leap off into other areas. And this is a focused historical discussion that I'm somehow obstructing? Please.

Every samurai had to know the Five Relationships and recite quotes from Confucianism from memory. Could the IJA do that? Of course not! These were no scholars. They were a ragtag bunch of rapists. Any comparison of them to earlier Japanese military figures is utter nonsense. I'd bet that most WW1 and WW2 amateur historian haven't read any Bushido because they'd likely think, "Why would I ever want to read something that resulted in the IJA?". That's how true nonsense gets started! No wonder we get these crazy topics in which people consider the IJA modern day samurai.

Corruption of the topic? You explained yourself, that Bushido was supposedly based on Confucianism. Anyone who knows about the living practice of Confucianism, and by living I don't just mean what people do today, but also what people have been doing for centuries, knows that the practice of Confucianism values civilian scholars and officials above all other professions. For someone to develop a warrior code based on Confucianism rather misses the point, and for people to actually venerate said warrior code further misses the point (there are periods and people in Chinese history where such values are prized above civilians; the Chinese call these times warring periods, and those people bandits). And then to expand the practice of these said warrior values?

Nah. Proper Confucianism requires the military to be kept to a minimum as defence allows, and for militarism not to exist at all. Only in such a society does the paternalism that Confucianism prizes properly work. What Bushido does is take the paternalistic aspects of Confucian society, but use it to uphold a militaristic society. Or at least that's the impression I get from modern fans of the Bushido philosophy. You want a properly Confucian warrior's code? Then get your soldiers to the frontiers, as far away from civilian centres as possible. If the civilians are feeding you, that's all you need to ask of them. If you ask any more, you're going way beyond your bounds. And if any kid thinks that soldiering is a heroic job and ideal, correct their mistaken beliefs and point them to the plough instead, or even a scholar's hat if their family can afford it.

[hellheaven1987]

It just shows that the supposedly Confucianism-based Bushido was itself a corruption of the deeply civilian-oriented philosophy that it claimed to be based on.

That is like saying the civilian-scholar base of Neo-Confucianism is a disgusting heresy from Classical Confucianism.

[Lord Oda Nobunaga]

Confucianism was adopted in Japan as early as the Tang dynasty and continued pretty strong until the Song or Yuan. Song Neo-Confucianism was a favourite topic for many Japanese scholars.
Of course you can't expect Japan not to follow it completely, that is without distortions. Confucianism was more like a government institution meant at centralizing the state alongside the Han reforms (the Japanese Han system that is). These types of centralization proved to be utter failures, similar Japanese copies of Chinese state philosophies went pretty badly as well, check how horribly the Japanese were beaten by the Emishi in the first millennia and how they had to switch their fighting styles (even weapons), military organizations and give power to local strongmen to keep the Emishi tribes in check.

[pannonian]

Confucianism was adopted in Japan as early as the Tang dynasty and continued pretty strong until the Song or Yuan. Song Neo-Confucianism was a favourite topic for many Japanese scholars.
Of course you can't expect Japan not to follow it completely, that is without distortions. Confucianism was more like a government institution meant at centralizing the state alongside the Han reforms (the Japanese Han system that is). These types of centralization proved to be utter failures, similar Japanese copies of Chinese state philosophies went pretty badly as well, check how horribly the Japanese were beaten by the Emishi in the first millennia and how they had to switch their fighting styles (even weapons), military organizations and give power to local strongmen to keep the Emishi tribes in check.

AIUI, the post-Sengoku Jidai form of Bushido was devised as a way to keep the demobilised armies in control and free of trouble; think Augustus demobilising the legions after the civil wars. Hence a highly ritualised warrior code, to make them think they're important, but in reality to keep them from being important. The comparison with chivalry in the west, especially with legend-based orders like the Arthurian Order of the Garter, is close enough, in that these orders were also created to keep the thuggish nobility out of trouble while the King ran the country free of their ambitions. The problem comes when people who actually believe in that nonsense get into positions of power and perpetuate these fairy tales as actual living codes of conduct. The Chinese had the right idea. Give the military freedom to carry out their mission, but keep them on the edge of existence and firmly subordinate them to civilian authority.

My favourite example of a civilian government putting an uppity military in its place is French though, when the uber glamorous 1st REP attempted a coup against the French government, was promptly turned on by regiments with more civic sense than it, and was ultimately disbanded. No matter how much of a warrior reputation the Foreign Legion had, the civilian government commanded authority which the soldiers should not and could not.

[Lord Oda Nobunaga]

I think that is a Confucian type value in the social sense, not so much in terms of a centralized government (isn't it interesting how Legalism and Confucianism tried to accomplish the same goal of centralization but by different means?). I think Bushido could also have been counter productive as some forms of it were for severe penalties. Even between classes, that's just horrible. On the other hand as Rubicon pointed out the centralization of authority with an ultra-nationalism can be just as horrible if not worse.

[hellheaven1987]

No matter how much of a warrior reputation the Foreign Legion had, the civilian government commanded authority which the soldiers should not and could not.

Hence why French is quickly became a sheep like Chinese.

[RubiconDecision]

Obviously caste systems are counter-productive to modern and postmodern historical periods, and why they are allegedly eliminated. The reality is the military has the power of enforcement both domestically and in foreign theatres, and so couple that with ultranationalism, then subtract moral courage and spirituality, and you get a completely out of control military like the IJA.

Low pay, conscription, and weapons results in violence to civilians: theft, rape, torture, maiming, and death. Haven't we seen that happen? But in the IJA during this period, it was orchestrated to enforce slave labor in Asia.

[Lord Oda Nobunaga]

Many of these insane lash outs by the IJA had to do with the many hardships suffered by the Japanese soldiers. No excuse, but seriously the supply and the fighting were absolute hell. The Americans and Australians faced a similar situation and the American soldiers were obviously better off but not by much.

[RubiconDecision]

There is no excuse for any barbarism done by the IJA. Would it have been better if Bushido was actually as important as German military tactics? My guess is yes, as chivalry and moral courage are all throughout Bushido. It's moral courage coupled with an honor so deep as to sacrifice yourself for your leader and country. Take away honor from soldiers and all you have are warriors out to kill as many as they can.

Bushido only works if it permeates the soldier. Anyone can give lip service to a code of honor, but actions speak louder than words. What kind of officers would any military academy have if they subtracted moral courage from the curriculum?

[pannonian]

There is no excuse for any barbarism done by the IJA. Would it have been better if Bushido was actually as important as German military tactics? My guess is yes, as chivalry and moral courage are all throughout Bushido. It's moral courage coupled with an honor so deep as to sacrifice yourself for your leader and country. Take away honor from soldiers and all you have are warriors out to kill as many as they can.

Bushido only works if it permeates the soldier. Anyone can give lip service to a code of honor, but actions speak louder than words. What kind of officers would any military academy have if they subtracted moral courage from the curriculum?

Ah, the imperative to obey one's leaders. An interview from a surviving member of Unit 731 remarked that he was at first uneasy at doing the things he was told, but orders were orders, and eventually he got used to it. Obeying one's leaders was exactly what happened in the imperial Japanese, with the military wagging the tail. The problem wasn't the military not following some kind of mythical code. The problem was the military calling the shots. And they were able to do so because the military had been glorified by said mythical code.

Compare with the Foreign Legion who enjoyed the same kind of status after the Battle of Algiers, and its most glamorous regiment thought they could overthrow the civilian government under De Gaulle. All other Legion units refused to join them, and even the 1st REP refused to fight when they came up against the undoubted authority of the territorial army. This recognition of the military that they were subordinate to the nation was true moral courage. Not some soldiers playing at being medieval warrior barons.

[Cyclops]

So back to the OP. What changed from 1900 to 1937 in Japan?

The IJA was created as part of the Meiji restoration. The feudal system it replaced had its arse kicked and the modern army proved itself effectiant with conquests in Korea (and were there some little police actions against pirates or something?).

The IJA was very much a European model army (very German IIRC), with mass conscription and an observance of the rules of war. It was also an organ of the central government.

Japanese performance in the Boxer rebellion and WW1 was respected by their allies but Japan was still subjected to institutionalised racism by Australia and the US that I know of, and I think the early 20th century was still a pretty racist time so they were probably seen as inferior by most "white" people. When Japan tried to enshrine racial equality in the League of Nations it was told to STFU.

The Great Depression saw pretty savage economic mismanagement, and the US took steps to protect its own economy that passed on the pain to the rest of the world. Extreme governments rose in many affected countries (eg Nazis, Phalangists) or became more extreme (Stalin's Soviet Union and Mussolini's Italy) and Japan was no exception.

I think botht he IJA and IJN backed coups and used terrorism to back expansionist agendas. Politicians were murdered and it was made clear to the Imperial court deviation would not be tolerated. It seems the Imperial family mostly approved of ther aggressive expansionist faction and took part with military roles.

So the changes in the Japanese army were (I think) when the military took control of the government (always a bad thing) and when Japan was economically damaged by the Depression. This lead to extremist actions untempered by responible government. The sort of rabid nationalism the extremists espoursed also contributed to cruelty and shocking behaviour in war.

I suspect Japan was also subject to higher levels of racist exclusion from the "Civilised Empire" club, so their efforts to take land in Asia were not accepted by established Imperial powers like the Dutch, English, French, US or Russia. This last is harder to prove, as many countires were subject to racist feelings from others. If Japan was subject to severe racism and exclusion (from the cultures they had so carefully and respectfully drawn their inspiration for reform) it could see them reject the military behavioural norms they espoused at first.

As a side note, Japanese nationalists appealed to Bushido as part of their extremist ideology. As they are Japanese, and some of the soldiers involved were descended from Samurai, and some of these men called themselves Samurai, serving an emperor who had ruled Samurai, to whom obedience was owed under older systems of Bushido, I think we can say the murderous Japanese doctrines of the early 20th century qualify as a form of Bushido.

[RubiconDecision]

snip

The word you're looking for is Wako (sometimes Wokou) that were pirates.

OK, nice suppositions. Read some Bushido and quote it and then see if you can find any discussion harming civilians to achieve your goals. I've already given links to the main Bushido texts as well as a free link to Nitobe (a pacifist) on Bushido and the most read book on Bushido in Nippon. That's a matter of record.
https://ia600202.us.archive.org/15/i....htm#RECTITUDE

RECTITUDE OR JUSTICE,

the most cogent precept in the code of the samurai. Nothing is more loathsome to him than underhand dealings and crooked undertakings. The conception of Rectitude may be erroneous—it may be narrow. A well-known bushi defines it as a power of resolution;—"Rectitude is the power of deciding upon a certain course of conduct in accordance with reason, without wavering;—to die when it is right to die, to strike when to strike is right." Another speaks of it in the following terms: "Rectitude is the bone that gives firmness and stature. As without bones the head cannot rest on the top of the spine, nor hands move nor feet stand, so without rectitude neither talent nor learning can make of a human frame a samurai. With it the lack of accomplishments is as nothing." Mencius calls Benevolence man's mind, and Rectitude or Righteousness his path. "How lamentable," he exclaims, "is it to neglect the path and not pursue it, to lose the mind and not know to seek it again! When men's fowls and dogs are lost, they know to seek for them again, but they lose their mind and do not know to seek for it." Have we not here "as in a glass darkly" a parable propounded three hundred years later in another clime and by a greater Teacher, who called Himself the Way of Righteousness, through whom the lost could be found? But I stray from my point. Righteousness, according to Mencius, is a straight and narrow path which a man ought to take to regain the lost paradise.
Even in the latter days of feudalism, when the long continuance of peace brought leisure into the life of the warrior class, and with it dissipations of all kinds and gentle accomplishments, the epithet Gishi (a man of rectitude) was considered superior to any name that signified mastery of learning or art. The Forty-seven Faithfuls—of whom so much is made in our popular education—are known in common parlance as the Forty-seven Gishi.
In times when cunning artifice was liable to pass for military tact and downright falsehood for ruse de guerre, this manly virtue, frank and honest, was a jewel that shone the brightest and was most highly praised. Rectitude is a twin brother to Valor, another martial virtue. But before proceeding to speak of Valor, let me linger a little while on what I may term a derivation from Rectitude, which, at first deviating slightly from its original, became more and more removed from it, until its meaning was perverted in the popular acceptance. I speak of Gi-ri, literally the Right Reason, but which came in time to mean a vague sense of duty which public opinion expected an incumbent to fulfil. In its original and unalloyed sense, it meant duty, pure and simple,—hence, we speak of the Giri we owe to parents, to superiors, to inferiors, to society at large, and so forth. In these instances Giri is duty; for what else is duty than what Right Reason demands and commands us to do. Should not Right Reason be our categorical imperative?

If you can find where Bushido matches up regarding harming civilians, then you might be partially correct. Good luck with that. Most amateur historians stop with what you wrote above, as they come to that conclusion without reading any Bushido.

What the IJA leadership took from Bushido was unquestioning loyalty to the Emperor and seppuku. That's all. Justice, Benevolence, Mercy, Rectitude, etc were excised as antiquated samurai doctrine. The samurai were not esteemed after 1895 but considered an aristocracy that had absorbed wealth from Nippon with little in return through acting as bureaucrats instead of defenders. Tokugawa started that nonsense.

[Dick Cheney.]

I'm surprised that nobody has mentioned this guy yet.

EDIT: I guess he came in 1853, but still he deserves credit for changing Japanese military mindset.



Commodore Matthew C. Perry, along with the US East India Squadron was solely responsible for opening Japan to western trade after nearly 200 years of self-imposed isolation. When Commodore Perry arrived in Japan in 1853 he used gunboat diplomacy and explosive Paixhans shells to scare the living daylights out of the feudal age Japanese cities until they finally accepted a series of treaties that guaranteed an open market place to all foreigners. The result of these treaties (including the Harris Treaty), was an influx of foreigners and western way of thinking into Japanese mindset that eventually spelled the end of the Shogunate and the beginning of the Meiji Restoration. Naturally though, the forced opening of Japan though gun point and later unequal trading parameters with its new western partners was also a tipping point for Japanese racism.

[Col. Tartleton]

Your post is so far out there that it's not possible to even discuss it and stay on topic. We're talking about 1900-1937 and how the Japanese changed. What you're proposing would then also be pressed onto American actions during the same window of time and based upon their torture methods from the founding of the American Republic. Is that seriously where you wish to go?

Had the samurai been fighting from 1900-1937, you might have a point. They were not. They were dissolved and the samurai DIED. What you're saying makes zero sense as it's different people entirely, a fraction of which were samurai descendants.

It's absurd.

Your argument is that a continuation of Samurai honor codes would have prevented the Japanese behavior in the early 20th century. I argue that the Samurai honor codes contributed to the Japanese behavior in the early 20th century. Maybe they weren't Samurai proper but they viewed themselves as something similar, at least like the Ashigaru, and the Ashigaru rose from armed peasants to lesser Samurai with the reforms of the Tokugawa Shogunate IIRC.

If they weren't imagining themselves to be Samurai and reading about Bushido why were they doing Seppuku? Why were they taking swords into battle, even in airplanes? Why were they wearing those thousand stitch belts? etc. etc. etc. Are you seeing a pattern? The Japanese were behaving as if they were Samurai. I know they technically weren't because that class was abolished and the army restructured around the commoner class, but the 20th century saw the Japanese military immerse itself in Samurai trappings and Samurai beliefs.

[RubiconDecision]

Commodore Matthew C. Perry, along with the US East India Squadron was solely responsible for opening Japan to western trade after nearly 200 years of self-imposed isolation. When Commodore Perry arrived in Japan in 1853 he used gunboat diplomacy and explosive Paixhans shells to scare the living daylights out of the feudal age Japanese cities until they finally accepted a series of treaties that guaranteed an open market place to all foreigners. The result of these treaties (including the Harris Treaty), was an influx of foreigners and western way of thinking into Japanese mindset that eventually spelled the end of the Shogunate and the beginning of the Meiji Restoration. Naturally though, the forced opening of Japan though gun point and later unequal trading parameters with its new western partners was also a tipping point for Japanese racism.

Yes, I agree. See this discussion to expand upon these ideas with the Western concept of the yellow peril as a reason for considering the Japanese as first backward, then later as dangerous when committed to imperilism, even though they'd be used to oppose Communism during 1917-1937, both Russians and Chinese Communists, as well as later combating Japanese Communism.
http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showt...1#post14025527

Your argument is that a continuation of Samurai honor codes would have prevented the Japanese behavior in the early 20th century. I argue that the Samurai honor codes contributed to the Japanese behavior in the early 20th century. Maybe they weren't Samurai proper but they viewed themselves as something similar, at least like the Ashigaru, and the Ashigaru rose from armed peasants to lesser Samurai with the reforms of the Tokugawa Shogunate IIRC.

If they weren't imagining themselves to be Samurai and reading about Bushido why were they doing Seppuku? Why were they taking swords into battle, even in airplanes? Why were they wearing those thousand stitch belts? etc. etc. etc. Are you seeing a pattern? The Japanese were behaving as if they were Samurai. I know they technically weren't because that class was abolished and the army restructured around the commoner class, but the 20th century saw the Japanese military immerse itself in Samurai trappings and Samurai beliefs.

Because the fools were indoctrinated that they were the peasant SUCCESSORS of the samurai who had divested themselves of the parts of Bushido that were superfluous i.e. Budo (the arts of war that were from the Sengoku period) and Chivalry (Justice, Mercy, Honor, etc).

The only remnants were Seppuku and undying loyalty to the Emperor. This seppuku was powerfully indoctrinated into each soldier, not only by the government who conscripted the soldier, but by making his family and friends pleading with the IJA soldier not to ever give up and never to be captured. They became death lovers, not following Budo or Bushido anymore.

That kind of argument is used with blaming/misunderstanding the Christianity of its beginnings (turn the other cheek), with medieval alterations in Christianity (kill the infidel), to fundamentalism (those who disbelieve are evil and those who alter the fundamentalism are heretics). All spiritual based systems (and Bushido is a spiritual based system of not only Shinto, Confucianism, and Buddhism but whatever the adherent also believes like Nitobe with Christianity) evolve so much as to be radical departures from what previous generations called it. What would Jesus think of intolerance and fundamentalism, for example versus his message of altruism as Christian love?

Your argument is precisely like saying postmodern American Marines are minutemen because they both espouse Liberty. Nope, they are not. They are different men and women who have not only altered the basic ideas of what are natural rights, but what's more, they're individuals not automatons.

The IJA thought of themselves as the trained military of a future Nippon, schooled with modern-postmodern German tactics, but keeping the idea of loyalty to the Emperor at all costs and committing seppuku rather than be captured. That's why they had banzai charges, for to die in battle meant honor to them, even if completely useless.

The opposite is true in Bushido. There one used one's life to save their leader or to save their community or to hold off the enemy so others could ESCAPE. Bushido is not uselessly wasting one's life, and if anyone thinks that, then look at the Bushido texts themselves. Some even condemn a wasted death.

Any amateur historian who wants to understand Bushido fully in order to make an argument concerning the IJA might read Thomas Cleary's book Training the Samurai Mind: A Bushido Sourcebook, as it contains the major daimyo house codes and discusses the evolution of Bushido.
http://books.google.com.pa/books?id=...page&q&f=false
He begins with Shiba Yoshimasa (1349-1410) to Saito Totsudo (1797-1865).

Seppuku in Bushido was done when:
1) One died to save their Master
2) One died to convince their Master to alter their path
3) One died to hold off the attacker long enough for the Master to escape
4) Since being captured might give the enemy information and one might be humiliated, then committing seppuku mean preventing dishonor to themselves
5) One had failed to serve the Master, had committed a grievous lack of doing one's duty (Giri) and justice dictated committing suicide to atone for it.

Seppuku in the IJA was done when:
1) In a hopeless situation, fight and charge even if it's stupid to do so
2) If captured they feared torture so the same as #4

That's not Bushido at all.

[Cyclops]

...

OK, nice suppositions. Read some Bushido and quote it and then see if you can find any discussion harming civilians to achieve your goals. I've already given links to the main Bushido texts as well as a free link to Nitobe (a pacifist) on Bushido and the most read book on Bushido in Nippon. That's a matter of record.
https://ia600202.us.archive.org/15/i....htm#RECTITUDE
If you can find where Bushido matches up regarding harming civilians, then you might be partially correct. Good luck with that. Most amateur historians stop with what you wrote above, as they come to that conclusion without reading any Bushido.

My reading of Japanese history is that they were humans, and like all humans they behaved well or badly, and aspired to codes of behaviour and often fell short. Bushido is a word that seems to have been used to describe some historical mindsets in the 18th or 19th century.

There are no comprehensive codes before then (and noithing using the word Bushido), rather a number of writings later conflated as if they were a coherent whole. We see a similar process of accreetion in other documents like Tao Te Ching, Greek myths or the Bible. Old stuff gets shoved together and bound up like it made sense.

A pacifist claiming to practice the way of the warrior seems to me to show Bushido is really a pretty flexible concept. I think warmakers in Japan over many periods have aspiried to codes of conduct, but not a consistent code at any period, and never a perfected code that has somehow been lost, or a period when war was conducted "honourably".

...What the IJA leadership took from Bushido was unquestioning loyalty to the Emperor and seppuku. That's all. Justice, Benevolence, Mercy, Rectitude, etc were excised as antiquated samurai doctrine. The samurai were not esteemed after 1895 but considered an aristocracy that had absorbed wealth from Nippon with little in return through acting as bureaucrats instead of defenders. Tokugawa started that nonsense.

I agree the Tokugawa period is where samurai identity is changed dramatically. They seem to have become a squire class administering the Shogun's will and engaging in duels over points of honour. War is not set about with quaint rules like that.

That said, I think many Japanese officers 1900-1937 thought of themselves as Samurai. I have a relative who says she is from a samurai family, who refuse to speak to her as she married a Scot (a member of the occupying forces). They are descended from samurai and are mentioned in Japanese histories (theres some reference to them burning down a castle).

We can argue over the legal points over when a class was abolished and who gets to call themselves a samurai (I'd argue non-japanese non soldiers like myself have no say) but I would sum up with a few broad observations. There were families who saw military sevcie as honorable, and called themselves samurai (descended from families calling themselves samurai for centuries) in Japan 1900-1930. These samurai families aspired to certain honourable norms but there is no comprehensive expression of that code that was ever practised perfectly in Japan. Ever.

If you have a Bushido code from 1200, called Bushido, then please link to it. If you have a gaggle of documents aspiring to honourable conduct, well I have seen them and they are not Bushido.

[pannonian]

Your argument is that a continuation of Samurai honor codes would have prevented the Japanese behavior in the early 20th century. I argue that the Samurai honor codes contributed to the Japanese behavior in the early 20th century. Maybe they weren't Samurai proper but they viewed themselves as something similar, at least like the Ashigaru, and the Ashigaru rose from armed peasants to lesser Samurai with the reforms of the Tokugawa Shogunate IIRC.

If they weren't imagining themselves to be Samurai and reading about Bushido why were they doing Seppuku? Why were they taking swords into battle, even in airplanes? Why were they wearing those thousand stitch belts? etc. etc. etc. Are you seeing a pattern? The Japanese were behaving as if they were Samurai. I know they technically weren't because that class was abolished and the army restructured around the commoner class, but the 20th century saw the Japanese military immerse itself in Samurai trappings and Samurai beliefs.

And the Japanese nationalism/Bushido link was alive enough, even post-war, for idiots like Mishima to act out their samurai fantasies. Which the Japanese military essentially were doing, en masse. Which is the problem when the warrior class is glamourised and elevated and their behaviour set as a societal ideal.

[RubiconDecision]

My reading of Japanese history is that they were humans, and like all humans they behaved well or badly, and aspired to codes of behaviour and often fell short. Bushido is a word that seems to have been used to describe some historical mindsets in the 18th or 19th century.

There are no comprehensive codes before then (and noithing using the word Bushido), rather a number of writings later conflated as if they were a coherent whole. We see a similar process of accreetion in other documents like Tao Te Ching, Greek myths or the Bible. Old stuff gets shoved together and bound up like it made sense.

A pacifist claiming to practice the way of the warrior seems to me to show Bushido is really a pretty flexible concept. I think warmakers in Japan over many periods have aspiried to codes of conduct, but not a consistent code at any period, and never a perfected code that has somehow been lost, or a period when war was conducted "honourably".



I agree the Tokugawa period is where samurai identity is changed dramatically. They seem to have become a squire class administering the Shogun's will and engaging in duels over points of honour. War is not set about with quaint rules like that.

That said, I think many Japanese officers 1900-1937 thought of themselves as Samurai. I have a relative who says she is from a samurai family, who refuse to speak to her as she married a Scot (a member of the occupying forces). They are descended from samurai and are mentioned in Japanese histories (theres some reference to them burning down a castle).

We can argue over the legal points over when a class was abolished and who gets to call themselves a samurai (I'd argue non-japanese non soldiers like myself have no say) but I would sum up with a few broad observations. There were families who saw military sevcie as honorable, and called themselves samurai (descended from families calling themselves samurai for centuries) in Japan 1900-1930. These samurai families aspired to certain honourable norms but there is no comprehensive expression of that code that was ever practised perfectly in Japan. Ever.

If you have a Bushido code from 1200, called Bushido, then please link to it. If you have a gaggle of documents aspiring to honourable conduct, well I have seen them and they are not Bushido.

I did for you. See the google book link. You can disregard the daimyo house codes, but they are Bushido (the Way of the Warrior) literally for each clan a personal Bushido code of conduct.

There are many people who claim such ancestry. Some of my ancestors were aristocrats who fought both for Japan, Okinawa, and in America. That and a couple of dollars will get you a cup of coffee at Starbucks. Whoop-de-do. So what? Does chivalry pass in the blood? Does an artistocratic ancestor mean that all were chivalrous? It's literally a big zero. What we do NOW is what matters, not resting on the coattails of some famous person.

And the Japanese nationalism/Bushido link was alive enough, even post-war, for idiots like Mishima to act out their samurai fantasies. Which the Japanese military essentially were doing, en masse. Which is the problem when the warrior class is glamourised and elevated and their behaviour set as a societal ideal.

What does Yukio Mishima have to do with 1900-1937? Or post-war discussion? Are you planning on discussing the topic?

[pannonian]

What does Yukio Mishima have to do with 1900-1937? Or post-war discussion? Are you planning on discussing the topic?

You claimed that the samurai were no more, and thus what people thought themselves to be was irrelevant to how the IJA behaved during the period in question. Yet here was someone, who topped himself as recently as 1970, who evidently thought of himself as one, where the link between the code and the nationalist ideology was undeniable.