2026-02-02
John Dower made full use of the privileged position of being an “American man” in postwar Japan.
This essay dissects his character through the knowledge of Masayuki Takayama and a discussion among Takashi Ito, Yoshitaka Fukui, and Michio Ezaki.
It critically examines the distortions of the Tokyo Trial view of history, historical revisionism, and the communist view of history.
I learned that, in Japan at that time, he had fully exercised the privileges of being an American man.
2016-12-13
Readers of the Asahi Shimbun should at least have known the name John Dower, but the Asahi Shimbun has never reported what kind of person he is.
Through the erudition unique to Masayuki Takayama, I learned that, soon after the war, while working as an English teacher in Kanazawa, he fully exercised the privileges of being an American man in a Japan then dominated by the “Give me chocolate” atmosphere.
The moment I learned this, I also understood what kind of person he was.
That is because Takayama’s statement arose precisely from his inability to tolerate the outrageous things Dower is now saying and doing against Japan in the United States.
It is a criticism of one outrageous individual, possible only for Masayuki Takayama, and resembling the judgment of Enma, the King of Hell.
What an utter fool this John Dower is.
The fundamental source of the abnormal reporting on Japan by The New York Times, The Washington Post, and other newspapers was this man.
Rekishitsu revealed this through a special discussion featuring Professor Emeritus Takashi Ito of the University of Tokyo, Professor Yoshitaka Fukui of Aoyama Gakuin University, and critic Michio Ezaki.
The emphasis within the text, apart from the headings, is mine.
Hold the Victorious Nations Accountable for Their “War Responsibility”!
When Will We Be Liberated from the Tokyo Trial View of History?
Ezaki
The preceding text is omitted.
The view recently promoted by the Asahi Shimbun and others—that the Constitution of Japan was by no means imposed upon Japan—is, in a certain sense, also “historical revisionism” directed against the established theory that it was “imposed by GHQ.”
However, is this not scarcely different from the bizarre “historical revisionism” that claims there were no gas chambers at Auschwitz?
It might be called “historical falsification” (laughs).
Conversely, the “Red Scare” led by McCarthy, the U.S. senator who had been scorned as an agitator, has come to be regarded as having had a factual basis following the disclosure of Venona, the intercepted and decrypted records of communications among Soviet spies.
Could this not be called legitimate historical revisionism?
Regarding the presence of Soviet spies within the Roosevelt Democratic administration, translations have been published of The Soviet World of American Communism: Underground Activities Records by Harvey Klehr, John Earl Haynes, and Fridrikh Igorevich Firsov (Gogatsu Shobo), and Venona: Decoding Soviet Espionage in America by John Earl Haynes and Harvey Klehr (PHP Institute).
I also discuss “historical revisionism” in the United States in my book The Falsehood of the Tokyo Trial View of History as Seen from the American Side (Shodensha Shinsho).
Fukui
I also address “historical revisionism” in my book The Most Advanced “World History” Unknown to the Japanese (Shodensha).
I pointed out that the post-Second World War conventional theory assigning sole responsibility to Germany for the outbreak of the First World War has been undergoing revision in recent years.
It is perfectly natural to revise previously accepted historical interpretations on the basis of newly discovered historical materials and evidence.
In that sense, the “Tokyo Trial view of history,” according to which Japan was entirely at fault in the last war, should also be revised on the basis of facts.
Ito
Recently, however, the Emperor’s abdication during his lifetime has become a subject of discussion, and when one listens to what has been reported as the words of the reigning Emperor, one suspects that he may hold the “Tokyo Trial view of history.”
Prime Minister Abe’s “Statement on the Seventieth Anniversary of the End of the War” was also fundamentally based upon the Tokyo Trial view of history.
Endowed with the authority of the Emperor and successive prime ministers, the Tokyo Trial view of history remains dominant within Japan’s historical academic establishment and the mass media.
I believe that properly revising this view of history will require an extremely difficult undertaking.
My book Japan Within and Without (Chuokoron-Shinsha), which describes in detail the illusions and disillusionment of communism in modern history, was completely ignored (laughs).
Up until the First World War, Japan aspired to become a nation capable of contending with and standing alongside the Western powers that ruled the world.
The League of Nations was established in 1920, and Japan became a permanent member of its Council alongside Britain, France, and Italy.
However, I believe that international society subsequently entered an era of struggle against communism, and in the latter half of Japan Within and Without, I therefore focus principally upon Japan’s conflict with international communism during the twentieth century and the subversive activities of the Comintern.
Yet, according to communists and pro-communist liberal progressive intellectuals, this constitutes an intolerable form of historical revisionism.
Presumably, they do not want it discussed.
There was no criticism, but neither was there any recognition.
It was completely ignored.
Even with Venona, which both of you frequently discuss, there are very few researchers in Japan who mention it.
Presumably, anyone who refers to these documents is branded a revisionist.
Ezaki
Gogatsu Shobo went bankrupt.
The PHP book is out of print, difficult to obtain from secondhand bookstores, and costs approximately ¥100,000.
It has become a legendary masterpiece that people cannot read even if they wish to do so (laughs).
Fukui
Professor Ito was among the earliest scholars to bring a breath of fresh air into the historical establishment, which had been strongly influenced by Marxism.
From the latter half of the 1960s through the 1990s, he published Research on the Political History of the Early Showa Period (University of Tokyo Press), Politics in the Showa Period, and its sequel (Yamakawa Publishing).
The new view of history presented in those works has not become outdated even today.
Against the majority who casually declared prewar Showa Japan to have been a fascist state, he demonstrated empirically that such claims lacked any foundation.
Since then, however, I feel that research into Japan’s modern history has regressed.
It also seems that the Tokyo Trial view of history has become increasingly entrenched.
Ito
When a peace treaty is concluded following a war, undesirable relations from the past are settled.
However, issues such as the “military” comfort women and the Nanjing Incident have increasingly been turned into problems afterward.
What is also strange is that, although the “authority” of communism collapsed long ago, a tendency can still be seen among some young people in Japan to immerse themselves in the Tokyo Trial view of history and even attempt to reinforce it.
There are such people even among former members of my seminar (laughs).
I believe they are pernicious revisionists.
To be continued.
*The sections concerning John Dower will appear in the following chapter and thereafter.