Who to break the chain of oppression first - Americans, Uchinanchu or Yamatonchu

Tuesday, September 23 2014 @ 01:13 AM JST

Contributed by: Y.Yamamoto

OUR GOAL IS TO MAKE YOU STOP TO THINK, AS WE ALWAYS PRACTICE HERE, RATHER THAN STOP THINKING. BEWARE NO ONE CAN DO THE THINKING ON YOUR BEHALF.


For me as leader, my time is nearly over. But for Scotland, the campaign continues, and the dream shall never die.

       - Alex Salmond, outgoing Scottish first minister, in his
         concession speech





In the first half of this year, I reread dozens of short and long poems from Man'yo-shu (The Anthology of a Myriad Leaves) along with books on Kojiki and Nihon Shoki, official history books compiled by court-retained historians in 712 and 720 AD, respectively. I also reread a book about Yamataikoku Naofumi Uchiyama authored after meticulously digging into tons of literature and material which told him dozens of conflicting stories about the origin of this country. The late Uchiyama was my brother-in-law, who was a multitalented Nissan executive.

Although nation's ancient history still remains more or less a riddle to me, now I have understood it can be roughly summarized like this:

In the Jomon Period (13th-15th century to 4th century BC,) this archipelago was inhabited by the Ainus and the Ryukyuans. And toward the end of the ensuing Yayoi Period (3rd century BC to 3rd century AD,) people from the three kingdoms (Goguryeo, Baekje and Silla) in the Korean Peninsula came, saw and conquered the indigenous tribes and dispersed most of them to the northernmost island of Hokkaido and the southern islands of the Ryukyus.

The first thing the conquerors did after they pacified the mainland is the compilation of Kojiki and Nihon Shoki. With these books they wanted to establish a false legitimacy of their rule by inventing the absurd myth that they had been there since 660 BC to reign over the nation. To that end, they sealed off the prehistoric truth, totally and for good.

It seems the compilation of both Kojiki and Nihon Shoki was ordered by 40th Emperor Tenmu (631-686 AD) although he died before these epics were completed. It's interesting to know that according to non-mainstream Man'yo scholar Yasuko Kobayashi, Tenmu was a disguised Korean general who defected from the Goguryeo Kingdom (later to be renamed Goryo,) one of the three kingdoms in the peninsula at the time.

On the other hand it still remains a mystery who ordered whom to compile Man'yo-shu, which is more of a lyric poetry at least on the surface, and what for he or she or they tackled the painstaking task of anthologizing 4,500-plus poems when the system called Man'yo Gana (phonogramic application of the Chinese ideograms) had yet to be established. But not a few Man'yo scholars believe it was also Tenmu who ordered the compilation although in the middle someone on the direct lineage of 38th Emperor Tenji (636-672 AD) took over the project.

Since I thought it was a total waste of time to delve into court infighting, all I know about Tenji is that he was Tenmu’s longtime nemesis because he was most probably a disguised Korean prince who defected from Baekje, another Kingdom of the Peninsula.

Yuji Seki, one of non-mainstream experts in Japan's ancient history, has repeatedly argued it's important to unmask these impostors because you can only prevent history from repeating itself by revealing the truth behind all this fabrication. Although the truth-seeking historian stops a little short of insisting Japan could have taken a different course than it actually did, he won't stop peddling around the plausible but unsubstantiated idea that the Japanese could learn an unequivocal lesson from its history.

Unlike with Seki, my only concern is who I am. Am I an East Korean, or a remnant of the Ainus or the Ryukyuans? As always my answer is: "I don't know exactly, and I don't really care either." All I know for sure is:

"I'm ME."

And yet I'm anxious to know why I'm so concerned about the fate of the Okinawans this late in life. I don't know the answer yet, but as a matter of fact, the Okinawa issue has always been one of the few things I can really internalize no matter what my ethnic origin might be.

In my previous post I introduced an impressive presentation Mr. Hiroaki Koide, Associate Professor at Kyoto University Research Reactor Institute, gave at Okinawa University.

If there was something to be desired in the otherwise excellent lecture, it's the fact that with his little worn-out antiwar, anti-American rhetoric, the nuclear scientist obscured his key message that each individual should be held responsible for his own suffering as well as others'.

For one thing Mr. Koide shouldn't have made a misplaced mention of the disproportionate burden on Okinawa by pointing out 74% of U.S. military bases in Japan are on the tiny islands that account for a mere 0.6% of the entire archipelago.

As you can see in the video embedded at the bottom of this post, former U.S. Defense Department official Morton Halperin recently visited Okinawa. (I got an impression that this female interpreter is a hearing-impaired and Japanese-illiterate person.) He was a key negotiator in the nominal reversion of Okinawa, but he left his post shortly before the agreement was signed because of a feud with Richard Nixon's national security adviser Henry Kissinger.

In one of the interviews with the Japanese newspapers, Halperin said:

"[When I first visited Okinawa in 1967] the American military did not believe there were bases on Okinawa. They believed Okinawa was a military base. Literally, they viewed the whole island as one military base." (Emphasis mine.)

That means the all-too-familiar story about 74% concentration of the U.S. military bases in Okinawa is essentially a nonissue frequently used as a red herring.

I don't think it's fair to expect a nuclear scientist to present his audience with well-informed, actionable ideas for the issue at hand. All I'm saying is that Koide should have dropped all this empty lip service if he had to stop short of elaborating on it. Even these geniuses like Albert Einstein and Robert Oppenheimer could do little more than playing "Cat's Cradle" after they let the genie out of the bottle.

I hadn't known this name Masaki Tomochi until I found it in the September 15 article of The Guardian. According to the British daily, Tomochi, who heads this study group for Ryukyus' independence, was now "seeking inspiration from Scotland." So at first I thought he must be one who was ready for what David Cameron said would be "a painful divorce" rather than "a trial separation" when the British Prime Minister was scaremongering on the eve of the referendum. But I was mistaken.

I was stunned to know from his inaugural press conference held in Okinawa in May last year that its constitution stipulates only ethnic Ryukyuans are eligible to join the study group which is meant to serve as the foundation of a new independence party.

His statement simply indicated he doesn't know anything about the mind-boggling tasks to be entailed in his essentially extralegal cause of secession.

Certainly Omochi knows secession is basically unconstitutional in any nation-state, and even the "International Law" and the U.N. Charter give nothing more than a muddled promise about "self-determination" of "people." And yet what this guy seems to be launching is nothing but an exclusive cabal which is the farthest thing from the Scottish National Party from which he was supposed to seek inspiration.

Omochi is just eying a handsome amount of alimony and property division at a minimal pain of divorce. A political racketeer like him doesn't give a damn about the fact that the only thing the cause of secession requires is committed individuals.

The Ryukyu independence movement has already been suffering a serious setback in the last decade. I started intensively discussing the issue some four years ago. In those days there sill were a certain number of people who were active in advocating the idea of secession. Lim John Chuan-tiong, then Assistant Professor at the University of Ryukyus, was one of them. But it seems this dubious British-Chinese has fled to Taiwan recently.

Now things are getting even uglier toward the gubernatorial election scheduled for November 16 as another murky figure slated himself as a pro-independence candidate. His campaign pledge was to let the Chinese People's Liberation Army along with troops from the Republic of Korea take the place of U.S. Armed Forces after the southernmost prefecture secedes. The fact that he quickly removed his name from the list in a matter of weeks indicates he was a spoiler whose role was to discredit Okinawa's aspiration for liberation.

In his book titled Dismantling the Empire, the late Chalmers Johnson wrote America's presence in far east is not only financially unsustainable but also morally obscene.

No doubt about that. Morally speaking, Americans should be held responsible more than anyone else for all the sufferings inflicted on Uchinanchu, as the people in Ryukyu Islands call themselves, and Yamatonchu, as they call mainlanders. But things about the perpetual occupation of Okinawa aren't that simple.

The most sticking point there is the fact that the situation still remained fluid before the loot was returned to the Japanese government that had once fenced it to the chief of thieves. But until the nominal reversion of Okinawa in 1972, the islanders did little more than untiringly commemorating April 28 (see NOTE 1) as "the day of infamy" while in fact May 15 (see NOTE 2) was going to bring about an aggravated humiliation. Their virtual inaction during the period from 1952 to 1972 makes them deserve all the sufferings that ensued.

NOTE 1: On April 28, 1952, a nominal sovereignty was returned to Japan.

NOTE 2: On May 15, 1972, Okinawa was nominally returned to Japan without superseding Hirohito's "Okinawa message" and the bilateral security treaty of 1960.

Actually Okinawa is not a moral issue, but a humanity issue. And needless to say, humanity here has absolutely nothing to do with your cheap humanism.

As I've repeated one hundred times in this single-issue blog, the only difference between the ape and man lies in the fact that unlike the ape, man thinks. In other words, while the ape may perform better than man in coming up with the right solution to a given problem, it's only man who can identify the real issue which he can really internalize. It's this ability of internalization that can find him the right cause to become committed without reservation.

In this context there is an intractable problem always facing us.

A heavily intoxicated man insists he is as sober as a judge. And a psychopath, almost by definition, doesn't doubt his sanity for a split second. Likewise, one who suffers the mental illness that I call premature senility never admits he is just shuffling information purely on an ear-to-mouth basis.

In the vast intellectual vacuum prevailing on both sides of the Pacific, it's these people who have adamantly refused to lend an ear to my argument on the basics about humanity.

They say they only believe in truth about reality. As a matter of principle I have no problem with that. Unfortunately, though, they tend to ignore the simple fact that if their truth is something that's already there awaiting revelation, it's not only useless but also harmful to uncover it because after all you can't undo anything once it came into existence.

That is basically why they are so prone to delusion that distorts your perception so severely that you believe history could have unfolded in a different way than it actually did.

Once duped by the guru of a truth-seeking cult, you'll soon develop abnormal fixation to the past and permanent inability to look to the future. What's wrong with the argument by a Holocaust-denier, for instance, is not that he denies the systematic slaughter of Jews, but that he denies what's done is done.

It's this delusion that made people brush it aside as a pipe-dream when I made a suggestion about a brand new sociopolitical model. I wrote, though in a little too sketchy way, there's no reason we can't do what the empty-headed kid named Mark Zuckerberg could do in a matter of a few years. Unfortunately, it seems quite unlikely that someday they will understand that it wasn't a pipe-dream, but a surreal dream, in the sense the Frenchman who first coined the word surréel (beyond reality) must have meant.

In recent years, we are seeing the first signs that the America-centric "international community" has started tottering. Particularly in the eastern part of Ukraine, Catalonia of Spain, and even some counties in American states, cracks are showing in the middle of the edifice and still widening, though very quietly and at a glacial pace. But the self-complacent and learning-disabled Americans don't seem to realize the post-WWII undercurrent has already changed.

As for the Islamic State in the Iraqi territory, all the Americans can say is that we shouldn't call it a nation because it's nothing more than a group of terrorists. They still believe they have the right to tell these guys how to build a new nation. They shouldn't forget their ancestors killed 24,000 Britons when pursuing their independence.

Someone from among my American audience said he defines the word "terrorist" like this: "A terrorist is one who terrifies." In response to the absurd truism, I asked him: "If you call them terrorists just because they beheaded an American journalist, what do you call Harry S. Truman and hundreds of millions of people behind him?" Thus far I haven't heard a word from this person.

Truman is the guy who incinerated more than 150 thousand citizens of the two strategically unimportant local cities, and many more, when it must have been a piece of cake for the United States to instantly decapitate the nation by destroying Hirohito who'd holed up in the palace in central Tokyo just like a sitting duck. Equally important, in 1947 he subtly blackmailed Hirohito into giving up Okinawa to the United States in exchange for his acquittal from execution at the Tokyo War Crimes Tribunal.

In the last ten years I've been calling on America's chattering classes to urge their president to immediately invoke the termination clause of the security treaty - and nothing else. Putting aside the heartache of the Okinawans, that is the only way to stop their own society from further sliding down the evolution tree. But all I've heard to this date from these brainless and spineless egomaniacs are transparent excuses such as,
"I was still a fetus when Truman ordered the genocide,"
"I didn't vote for Bush,"
"I don't support Obama,"
"I hope I'll be dead by the time Hilary Clinton is elected U.S. President,"
and so on and so forth.

What a NINCOM-P-O-O-P-ISH people.

Now I must conclude that to the Americans, the Yamatonchu, and even not a few Uchinanchu as well,

OKINAWA IS ALWAYS SOMEONE ELSE'S PROBLEM AND WILL REMAIN SO UNTIL DEATH DO US PART.

This leaves me alongside a small number of Okinawans still dreaming of something beyond the reality of modern nationhood. What we envision here may not look very real as yet. But we are just saying what looks to be there, e.g. the runt in the Imperial Palace, is actually nonexistent, while you guys insist what actually isn't there, e.g. the Black Kenyan Monkey fighting against terrorists, is existent. It's obvious which is a mere delusion that gets us nowhere.

Comments (11)


TokyoFreePress
http://www.TokyoFreePress.com/article.php?story=20140919004158191