Joodi+Son

I think Korea and China should have a say in what Japan puts into its textbooks because they were part of that history. If Korea and China doesn’t have a say in it than Japan could not put what was actually part of history. They could put into textbooks what they want to, that would make them look good and Korea and China look bad. I think that Korea and China should have a say because they were a huge part of their own history in my opinion. They were the victims of the war.
 * Should Korea and China have a say in what Japan puts into its textbooks?**

Although the Japanese government might not say that Korea and China have a say in what they put into their own countries textbook but Korea and China might not say the same. They were affected in a way they should have never been because of the Japanese. If Japan doesn’t put the right history in the textbooks than the citizens of Japan may never find out the real truth and they might make the same mistakes. Next time Korea and China won’t just be little weak ducklings but they will attack back and that might turn into something very big. All in all, I think that Korea and China should have a say in what Japan puts into its textbooks.

8.) Write a short reflection of what you learned from these readings. With the benefit of hind site and knowledge of China and Japan, would Korea had been better off if it had “opened up to the west.” I think it might have been better if Korea had been a little more open and they had opened up to the west because if they had known the circumstances of Japan and China then they would have known better to allow the Western influence and become stronger. But I also think that they did well in not opening up to the Westerners because had they opened up they would have probably lose their identity and we wouldn’t be who we are today. Because Korea was having a hard time economically if someone was willing to help or influence them Korea would have probably taken it willingly or would have been forced to anyway.
 * Reflection**

Reading the introduction, I was shocked at how bad this event was. The vivid descriptions of the slaughters of people make it seem like it would be impossible to ignore such a tragedy but people have, especially the Japanese themselves. As I was reading, I thought of the Nazi in Germany. The Nanking Massacre included very sadistic methods of torture, mentally and physically. It surprised me how the Japanese covered this event up s much, and how some Japanese still deny it ever happened at all. It is not covered in most history textbooks in America and not covered in any of the Japanese textbooks.
 * Reflection: Intro of The Rape of Nanking**

Through the writing, the author shows that she wishes to raise awareness and present the story to the world. It is so frustrating that the massacre happened, but what is disappointing the most is the disregard of the Japanese. In the intro, Chang states that some officials still stayed in power even after the war, which was more surprising. I had always been a big fan of Japan not knowing this history, but this made me think twice. But know it is the past and I hope nothing like this happens again.


 * Guiding Questions:**
 * 1) What is a massacre, holocaust, and genocide?** A massacre is "the act or an instance of killing a number of usually helpless or unresisting human beings under circumstances of atrocity or cruelty" (merrian webster dictionary). A holocaust is "the mass slaughter of European civilians and especially Jews by the Nazis during World War II —usually used with the b: a mass slaughter of people; any mass slaughter or reckless destruction of life." A genocide is "the deliberate and systematic destruction of a racial, political, or cultural group."


 * 2) Was "The Rape of Nanking" a genocide and/or holocaust?** I think the Rape of Nanking was both a genocide and a holocaust. Because in a way the soldiers who were a part of the Rape of Nanking was raping and killing people for their own selfish needs but then again they were killing the Chinese because they thought they were superior to them; that giving them a reason to kill making it a genocide.


 * 3) Why do you think some refer to it as a massacre?** I think some people refer to it as a massacre because so many people were killed during the Rape of Nanking and most of the people killed were helpless and unresisting people killed just for the heck of it.


 * 4) Does the term we ascribe (assign to) really matter?** I don't think the term we assign to the Rape of Nanking really matters because in the end thousands of people were killed and we can't bring them back. Calling it a massacre, holocaust, or genocide; and trying to separate them into groups and arguing what it is won't change anything. There were thousands of lives lost during the Rape of Nanking and that's what it is.


 * 5) Why do we study such horrific events?** I think we study such horrific events so that these events won't happen again. I also think to not study these events mean that those who lost their lives during these horrific events meant nothing; so to study them also gives some kind of meaning to them.


 * Is Rape of Nanking a massacre, holocaust, or a genocide?** Personally I think it is a little bit of everything. Many people, hundreds and thousands, were killed; and most of these people were civilians or soldiers who already surrendered making it a massacre. It is also a holocaust because it was a mass slaughter of people; and it is also a genocide because they deliberately killed the Chinese because they were Chinese because they thought the Chinese were weak cowards who surrendered so easily.