How Did Japan Adequate Democracy And Occupation Of Japan?

During the 1800s, the island nations of Great Britain and Japan depended on their location to move them forward. Although they share many geographical similarities, they began handling their government policies very differently. While Japan's isolationist policies kept it locked in the past, imperialist Britain charged forward into a bright and powerful future. It would take the weakening of one Japanese government to bring about the rise of another, a government that would be far more modern and progressive than the last. Overall, when handled to their advantage, the geography of these island nations seemed to positively influence them.

On Sunday morning, December 7, 1941, at 7:55 AM the Japanese Empire led a surprise attack on the US Naval base Pearl Harbor in Hawaii, that would leave millions of Americans in shock, and heartbroken. Before the attack, the United States kept a low profile on International affairs, and concentrated on the domestic affairs at hand. This tragic moment in American history forever remembered. It is a mournful day for the American people, although, for the Japanese Empire it was an honorable day, one they would call a

Assess the impact of the war on civilians in territories occupied by Japan in South-East Asia.

While World War II had been ongoing since 1939, Japan had been fighting for the Axis powers, against the United States. In 1941, when Japan had attacked Pearl Harbor, the United States government had assumed the viewpoint that the Japanese were not to be trusted, and that the Japanese-American citizens of the United States were much the same. As such, they had resorted to establishing internment camps, or preventive labor prisons, so as to keep them in check and ostensibly to prevent further Japanese sabotage. However, the government’s actions were not fully justified, as several factors had interplayed into the circumstances that directly contradicted the intentions and visible results of the internment of the Japanese-Americans, in the social, political, economical, and cultural aspects. On the whole, the internment camps served as drastic measures which were not wholly without reasoning; contrarily, those factors in support of the internment camps did not override those which had gone against it, since the United States’ own legislation, in the form of the Constitution and other laws, had explicitly prevented the depriving of human rights, privileges, and pursuits, which had doubtless applied in light of the Japanese-Americans’ universal citizenship along the Pacific Coast in the early 1940s. As such, while the internment camps were not completely unjustified and without purpose from the viewpoint of the government, they did not align with standards of law and

From 1853 to 1941, Japan changed from being a reclusive, isolated nation that kept to itself to an imperialistic power openly attacking and conquering surrounding territories and peoples.

During this time period, both India and Japan faced a new situation: the new imperialism of Europe. India was unable to defend themselves, thus leading to them becoming a colony of Britain. Japan however, selectively borrowed from the Europeans after proving themselves to be equals of the once superior Europeans. Despite having such contrasting fates, both India and Japan had similarities in the miserable work conditions for peasants. But because India was a colony while Japan was a country, India data was recorded by British officials and Japanese data was record by Japanese officials. Another difference was the source of labor for textile production. India had mostly men workers whereas Japan

In Pearl Harbor and the Coming of the Pacific War by Akira Iriye, the author explores the events and circumstances that ended in the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor, an American naval base. Iriye assembles a myriad of primary documents, such as proposals and imperial conferences, as well as essays that offer different perspectives of the Pacific War. Not only is the material in Pearl Harbor and the Coming of the Pacific War informative of the situation between Japan and the United States, but it also provides a global context that allows for the readers to interpret Pearl Harbor and the events leading up to it how they may. Ultimately, both Pearl Harbor and the subsequent Pacific War between

The research question of this essay is “To what extent was the atomic bombing of Japan at the end of the Second World War Justified? In 1945, the United States authorized the dropping of the atomic bomb on the Japanese cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. The first bomb, dropped on August 6th 1945, had a total casualty rate of 135,000, including non-combatant civilians, and as this, the atomic bombing of Japan at the end of the Second World War has indeed been a hugely discussed topic within academic and social circles until today. There have been historians, academics, and other influential individuals throughout the world who have argued on both sides of the spectrum regarding the effects of the bombings on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, and whether they were necessary and justified towards the ending of the conflict. According to the Center For Strategic and International Studies (CSIS), by 1944, it had become clear to both the United States and the Empire of Japan that Japan was indeed losing the war, and as this, there are many arguments and counterarguments regarding the effectiveness of the atomic bombing of Japan, as well as suggestions regarding alternatives due to the enormous human toll the bomb caused.

America’s use of the atomic bombs on the Japanese cities also opened the door to other countries challenging them through their own use of nuclear bombs. Many have criticized that the atomic bomb was an act of “muscle flexing” due to the sheer power and destruction caused by the decision to drop the two bombs. (Nicholls, 67). Not only were these bombs a demonstration of the power that these nuclear weapons had, but they were a testament of power that the United States now held. Never before had a country surrendered in war without first being invaded, so the decision to drop the bomb and Japan's subsequent surrender were extremely significant (Baldwin, 39). These bombings didn’t just impact the Japanese, but the whole world and gave way to

In conclusion, the Japanese are a resilient and honor bond people who know when they are beaten. This along with all the other statements mentioned in this paper goes to show that Japan would have surrendered if the bombs were not dropped. Although funding the War would have been much harder to do. Many more Americans and Japanese soldiers would have died as well. But, in the end the bombs didn’t need to be

It was during the Edo period, also known as the Tokugawa period (1600 - 1868) when Japan made the decision to isolate itself from the rest of the world. The Japanese believed any contact with the outside world would contaminate and disrupt their strictly organized society, which was why they limited their contact with other civilizations. This period of isolation led to many factors such as, no warfare or exchange with other countries. This also meant that there was not any influence from different cultures, knowledge, or economy. For most of the Edo period, Japan was a peaceful place with happy people.

At the end of World War II, the United States took occupation of Japan in an under the pretext of leading the nation toward a path of democracy. However, it appears that the intent of the United States has changed over time. Instead of helping Japan in the years after WWII, the United States used Japan as a pawn to better its own interests.

Imagine a road. The horrid smell and images of bloodshed flash through your head as you try to focus on walking down this path. You soon come to the disgusting realization that you are walking upon dead soldiers. Trenching forward you approach a fork in the road. Surrounded by death you try to keep your head clear, and focus on making a clear decision. Seemingly both roads end in traumatic loss of human life. You soon realize you are on the path of war, the most destructive path in human history. The metaphorical road we walk upon is analogous to the pacific war, a war that became Americas focal point after the fall of the third Reich in Berlin. With this war came Harry Truman’s dilemma, to bomb, or not to bomb. The decision would be questioned for decades to come. The pacific war ended with the first and last atomic bomb to ever be discharged. Although whether Truman’s decision was the right one is arguable, you may find that through investigation of this war, many compelling reasons to use the atomic bomb jump out at you. To draw the conclusion that the Japan bombing was the correct decision, one must examine these five topics: Japan’s culture and values during world war two, Japan’s tactical military strategies, the culture of world war two, alternatives to bombing and the arguments that are against using the atomic bomb.

Throughout the work, Fujitani draws evidence from, and references, a plethora of different sources that add validity to his statements and accounts of not only what the Japanese and United States did, but also why they acted the way they did. In a time of war, both countries took different actions that were not readily understood. Japan

Japan reacted by modernizing quickly through the Meiji Restoration to ensure they themselves didn't fall behind the West. This proved successful as Japan was treated as a "great power" along with the Europeans. After Japan defeated Russia in a big war in 1905, it impressed the Europeans and so Japan's prestige rose with Japanese nationalism increasing tenfold. Throughout this time, Japan did not like Western influence in Asia. This prompted them to create a Japanese "sphere of influence" to rid Asia off all Europeans and unite Asians under Japanese rule. This plan was what started WWII in the Pacific. Ironically, the Japanese treated their conquests worse than the Westerners did. However, because Japan effectively rid the Europeans from Asia during WWII, it broke the image that the Westerns were "unbeatable" and gave the native Asians hope to fight for independence against the West (i.e.