Eunsoo+Suh

Reflection

From the reading the introduction part of the Rape of Nanking, I could notice the variety of events happened in the past. While I was reading it, I thought how this event is very similar to the Holocaust in Germany. And I was shock how the Japanese can be so Inhumane and cruel toward these inoocenct people in China. Becuase Iris Chang the author believes that all people should know how this terrible events had happend in this world but the author is impressed that how popele don't really know this event had happened in the past. The most interesting fact is that the Japanese people tend to deny that they had killed multiple of people in China and had done terrible things to them. They ignoring the fact what they have done disregarding the evidences of pictures is surprising.

Guiding Questions: 1) What is a massacre, holocaust, and genocide?

Massacre - an indiscriminate and brutal slaughter of people Holocaust - destruction or slaughter on a mass scale Genocide - the deliberate killing of a large group of people

2) Was "The Rape of Nanking" a genocide and/or holocaust? The Rape of Nanking was a genocide.

3) Why do you think some refer to it as a massacre? Because the Japanese soldiers killed, tortured, and even raped the Chinese civilians.

4) Does the term we ascribe (assign to) really matter? Yes. Because each word has its own proper meaning that fits into a certain category.

5) Why do we study such horrific events? We study in order to understand more about the history backgrounds and to learn how the human could actually do things that are inhumane. Genocide: the deliberate and systematic destruction of a racial, political, or cultural group. Look up the other massacre.

Holocaust: 1: a sacrifice consumed by fire 2: a thorough destruction involving extensive loss of life especially through fire 3 a) often capitalized : 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;

1) Read through the allegations (accusation). Choose three of the most compelling ones whether you agree or not. Allegation 1. Japanese school textbooks ignore or trivialize the events at Nanking.                - I agree with this statement due to the fact that the textbooks don't describe detail enough to be understood how the Japanese soldiers were inhumane. Allegation 2. Japanese official apologies for Nanking are insincere, evasive, incomplete, and irrelevant redress is imperative. The emperor should get on his knees and apologize for Nanking.                  - I agree because as Mr.Osterweil mentioned in class, the reason why the Nanking Massacre is not very known by many people compare to the day when bombs were dropped in Hiroshima by the U.S naval is because the Japanese has never officially apologized to the Chinese civilians. Allegation 3.                 -  Until the appearance of the Chang book, no nonfiction publication had ever covered the event at Nanking in substantive detail, and Japanese titles on the subject are scarce because publication would endanger the authors' lives. - This allegation talks about how there was no book published about the Japanese solider during the Nanking Massacre before the Chang book. However in the rebuttal, it refutes it because there already had books published before Chang's book was written. 2) Which rebuttal seems the least credible and why based on your knowledge of the Rape of Nanking? I think that the one that rebuts about the text books should not contain too much detail about the massacre because it isn't very helpful for the education. is the least credible one based on my knowledge. As it says that because "the much-maligned Ministry of Education does not dictate the choice of textbooks used in the school nationally." However sometime truth is necessary for the people to develop their understanding skill and to know the value of actual war. Not the violence is the crucial part but facts are the important ones need to be known. Many students in now days can not understand why the old times soldiers needed guns.

3) What do you make of Coox’s argument that the RON was not a Holocaust? Does calling it as such really detract from the German holocaust, as Coox states? In my opinion, the nanking massacre was not a Holocaust, because definition for holocaust is the mass murder of certain religion or certain group of people, however the nanking massacre wasn't a murder of certain groups of people. In order to take more territories the japanese soldiers killed the chinese civilians. Holocaust is something more than just a normal massacre. 4) Coox attacks the notion that Nanking was perpetrated from the highest levels of the Japanese government down and that it was orchestrated to instill terror. Do you think his argument is credible? How much actual evidence is there in Chang’s book suggesting that high governmental officials knew and condoned the atrocity? (You should refer to chapter 8 to help you)