DiscussWorldIssues - Socio-Economic Religion and Political Uncensored Debate - View Single Post

**scemHeish** · 12-21-2010, 09:12 PM

I never compared the whaling to war crimes, but simply stated why I don't like about Japan. I have zero sympathy for the Japanese and the civlilian casulties caused by dropping two a-bombs on them. We were in a state of war initiated by the Japanese and that act by the US ended a world wide conflict.

Right. And what I can't figure out is why, if you're ok with the a-bombs, you are not ok with the Bataan Death March. From a tactical point of view, both were sound.

I think it is awful that the bison were slaughtered. what's your point? My point is that citing a historical occurrence as a practice you condemn in a culture makes no sense, similar to the one in my case. You can be as upset with the individuals involved as you want, but when you say "I am not an expert on Japanese culture, but here's what bothers me" it seems as if you're holding up specific acts as representative of a culture. If you're going to do that, take a long hard reflection on American culture.

Yes, the horse cited is special. It won the two premier races in the world and deserved better than being slaughtered when it could have lived another 5 years. It is industry standard to "pension" stallions except in Japan. Why is that? Cultural imperialism here. Just because a practice is considered proper in one area does not mean it translates to all cultures. When a milk cow no longer produces milk in our culture, we slaughter and render it. There are about a billion people in India that think that idea is absolutely horrific. Why do we do it when there are so many more people against the practice? This is just a cultural difference. We don't think cows are sacred, and they don't think race horses are sacred, just property to do with as they see fit. You shouldn't be outraged or even view a culture negatively just because they don't follow the same anglo-normalized viewpoint that you have. As for "why" it is, it's probably the same reason that the Japanese don't bury their dead, and only cremate them. They have 130 Million people squeezed into an area less than the size of California. Pastoral land is a premium. They probably didn't want to foot the cost to ship the horse back across the pacific and chose a pragmatic approach instead.

Also, if you re-read my post I said that I am hesitant to paint a race with such a broad brush meaning that I don't think it was a prevalent throughout their entire society, but that there are a number of examples I could easily cite. Maybe I could have explained that a little better. Maybe it was a simple case of wording, but it seemed like you were saying "I'm hesitant to paint a race with broad strokes, but I'm going to anyway in this case." It's like people who say "no offense, but..." and then proceed to insult you. I'll chalk it up as a misunderstanding though, due to your clarification.

12-21-2010, 09:12 PM	#13
scemHeish Join Date Oct 2005 Posts 442 Senior Member	I never compared the whaling to war crimes, but simply stated why I don't like about Japan. I have zero sympathy for the Japanese and the civlilian casulties caused by dropping two a-bombs on them. We were in a state of war initiated by the Japanese and that act by the US ended a world wide conflict. Right. And what I can't figure out is why, if you're ok with the a-bombs, you are not ok with the Bataan Death March. From a tactical point of view, both were sound. I think it is awful that the bison were slaughtered. what's your point? My point is that citing a historical occurrence as a practice you condemn in a culture makes no sense, similar to the one in my case. You can be as upset with the individuals involved as you want, but when you say "I am not an expert on Japanese culture, but here's what bothers me" it seems as if you're holding up specific acts as representative of a culture. If you're going to do that, take a long hard reflection on American culture. Yes, the horse cited is special. It won the two premier races in the world and deserved better than being slaughtered when it could have lived another 5 years. It is industry standard to "pension" stallions except in Japan. Why is that? Cultural imperialism here. Just because a practice is considered proper in one area does not mean it translates to all cultures. When a milk cow no longer produces milk in our culture, we slaughter and render it. There are about a billion people in India that think that idea is absolutely horrific. Why do we do it when there are so many more people against the practice? This is just a cultural difference. We don't think cows are sacred, and they don't think race horses are sacred, just property to do with as they see fit. You shouldn't be outraged or even view a culture negatively just because they don't follow the same anglo-normalized viewpoint that you have. As for "why" it is, it's probably the same reason that the Japanese don't bury their dead, and only cremate them. They have 130 Million people squeezed into an area less than the size of California. Pastoral land is a premium. They probably didn't want to foot the cost to ship the horse back across the pacific and chose a pragmatic approach instead. Also, if you re-read my post I said that I am hesitant to paint a race with such a broad brush meaning that I don't think it was a prevalent throughout their entire society, but that there are a number of examples I could easily cite. Maybe I could have explained that a little better. Maybe it was a simple case of wording, but it seemed like you were saying "I'm hesitant to paint a race with broad strokes, but I'm going to anyway in this case." It's like people who say "no offense, but..." and then proceed to insult you. I'll chalk it up as a misunderstanding though, due to your clarification.
	Quote