If that is your take,that’s fine.But you do admit that the PM’s suspencion of visiting Yasukuni serves “public interest”now.Right,Ponta?

It really depends.
In a legal sense, no. You need more stronger reason to suspend his right.
In a political sense, again it depends on the internatioal situation.If the hysterical chinese nationalism is strong, and there is no reason to stimulate it more, and there is a sign that it will affect Japan’s economy, and security, it is Japan’s interest that comes heavily in his decision even if their claim is not justified.

If there is no effect in economy and security, and if the Chinese people understand the meaning Japanese people visit for Yasukuni, there is no public inteterest to suspend his visit.

As for the rest of the comment, well…
I don’t want to get involved in “you said, No I don’t” type of the argument. Let’s leave the judgment to the readership.
But you should notice, once you admitted it is his constitutional right, it weighs heavily. At the least, it is legally right, permissible for PM to visit Yasukuni.
And to deny such an important legal right as the freedom to faith, you need a strong reasons.
Linking arbitrarily Yasukuni with the symbol of the religion oppressing other religion when it has not oppressing for more than 60 years and blaming it is not strong enough to overturn his right.
It is easy to see it, (I hope my argument stands.)
It was not just Yasukuni but a state shinto that praciticed the oppression of people’s faith. (People in colonized countries were forced to visit the shrine:though they could still hold their own religion)
Christianity oppressed other religions.
You can link it with the (past) oppressive religion.
But you can not blame people visiting the church praciticing Chrisitianity and deprive his right.

And it is important to realise the right involved is the right to religion. if the his right to religion is denied just by speculating that his motive is political, there is no meaning that the constitution has approved the the right to religion;You can oppress any religion by that. I am concerned that many criticims against PM’s visit fall into this category.

In my eye, for PM’s decision to visit Yasukuni, China’s move alawys play a big role. And I respect your policy and your type of nationalism of kissing the ass.

I never changed my mind.I wrote the reason before.My word of saying “PM has no right “is purely the way of the word,not mentioning his constitutional rights.I do not agree with you in a sense that visiting Yasukuni is a right decision and PM’s right should be suspended from doing so.

“Who claimed the the current opinion violates their freedom?”

I think it was PM Miki.

“The debators who call someone “a troll” for no reason, and who kept saying nobody has call me a troll yet”

No one is actually calling you a troll yet.Is that what you’ve been called in the other site like The Marmot Hole?

” because the faith to religion is guraranteed to all, just as he can visit to Buddhist temple in private capacity to pray at the funeral.”

And as I’ve said visiting any buddhist temple and visiting Yasukuni is two different thing.They can not be compared.

“Some people link Yasukuni with the symbol of the religion that oppressed other religions. Christianity was like that,it used to burn people alive if the　peson turned out to be a pagan.Yasukuni was not doing things like that”

“That is the very convinient way to attak the politicians. But I hope peope will not start attacking and oppressing Chrisitian politicians, Buddhist politicians like that.”

You are confusing politics and religion again here.
It seems your favourite(and only)idea on this issue….

People are criticizing Yasukuni not as the symbol of the religion(which is Shinto),but the policy of the government at the time symbolized by Yasukuni,imposing state shinto upon all the religion and oppress those who do not obey the policy.People are also criticizing the character of Yasukuni as the religious institution,that honor the war dead and justifying the past invasions,Again not criticizing shinto.

“It is even possible to see Yasukuni as the one where they enshrined whoever was killed in their sphere related to the crazy war game just as the cases I mentioned above.”

Not really.The examples you’ve reffred are both pure accidents.War is not.

“culutural difference make it harder for Chinese people to understand the ritual. Chinese spit on the crimial for thousands years, Japanese fear and worship the dead no matter who. It is vital to explain the meaning we give to the dead is different.”

It is neither culture nor ritual that the Chinese(and many in Japan and the world) are criticizing.What matters here is what those who are honored at Yasukuni did before they died and what does it represent to some.(Including visiting PM).

“Besides, it is very convinient for China to exploit Yasukuni as their symbolic target of ultra nationalism. Nationalism is the CCP’s new ideology when few believe in communism. And when fueled by nationalism, rational explanatoin is hard to work.”

I wouldn’t call that an”ultra”for that is a natural emotion for the victim,is it not?
and You can not point other’s wrong while justifies your own(something you seemed to like doing all the time)The two wrongs would not make one right.

“Having said that it does not mean Yasukuni have made sufficient efforts to make misunderstanding cleared.”

Not by the current exhibit at Yuusyukan and war criminal being honored there.
Anyway these are your wishful thinking,by no means reflecting the state of Yasukuni at the present.

“My conclusion is the same.
PM has the right to visit Yasukuni in private capacity.
It is desirable that he account for his action fully so that no body misunderstand he is praising the crimianality of the A-crime and people understand it is not unusual at all for Japanese to worhship the war-dead. .”

No,not really.You never said “It is desirable that he account for his action fully so that no body misunderstand he is praising ”

“But against hysterical wind, there is nothing you can do. In that sense, Abe’s tactics might have been not bad.
Political considerations comes in his decision as a matter of fact. He decides, everything ,icluding his religioius desire to vist, considerd”

So,now you talk “tactics”.What about Abe’s all too important”freedom of faith” you’ve been crusading.and where are those politiicans bringing this to the court,fighting for the dignity of his souls?
I don’t believe an inch of this “religious freedom” argument regarding Yasukuni if I see no credible explanation from either the PM nor some LDP old guard.

“I sencond X, I agree with Y” have been proved to be
useful way to survive. Kiss-the-big power’s ass no matter what have been proved to be sucessful.”

If that is your take,that’s fine.But you do admit that the PM’s suspencion of visiting Yasukuni serves “public interest”now.Right,Ponta?

Let me ask you then.
(1)Does PM have the constitutional right to faith?
(2)Does PM have the the constitutional right to visit Yasukuni?

Both are “Yes”.

I am glad you finally changed your opinion, agreeing with me. That is what I have been arguing from the strat.

Since he can visit any shinto shrine in his own private capacity,Insisting on Yasukuni would means his primal motivation is not religious.

The motivation does not affect his right.
And you are just speculating his motivation.Yasukuni is the shrine the deceased promised to meet.

Then PM’s act is neither tranparent nor has enough accountability.

I suggest you to reconstruct your artument here.

If you are siting in a crowded train….

That is understandable argument. It means many things must be put into considerations besides his right to visit Yasukuni in his decision.

Our nation is build upon the number of political arrangements. Including constitution and San Fransisco Treaty that enables us to be the member of the international society we’ve once ostracized. Visiting Yasukuni by Japanese PM is against the broad wish and request from international community and giving the wrong impression of we are vioalting the spirit of SF treaty.It will disturb the fundamental value we state at the foundation of the post-war Japan,and that is against pulic interest in any measure.

To some extent I agree. But it is not the case anyone can impose their impression and you have to accept it.
You can explain what it mean for Japanese to worship the war-dead. Just as you tried hard to make misunderstanding cleared as for the comfort women.

“In my opinion, their freedom to faith is guaranteed by the constitution just like the freedom to visit in private capacity any shrine including Yasukuni is guaranteed by the constitution.”

That still do not justifies PM visit to the Yasukuni.And if any of these politicians actually think that the current opinions against Yasukuni visit are violating their freedom guaranteed by the constitution, How come none of them bring this to the court?

His act is justified legally. Whatever PM does, he is
subject to political criticism.
Who claimed the the current opinion violates their freedom?
……………………………………….

The debators who call someone “a troll” for no reason, and who kept saying nobody has call me a troll yet, have argued against my thesis that PM has the right to visit Yasukuni in private capacity as long as he does not violate the separation of the religion and the state, because the faith to religion is guraranteed to all, just as he can visit to Buddhist temple in private capacity to pray at the funeral.

They sometimes have argued that Yasukuni and praying at Yasukuni is not religious,though they admit Yasukuni is a religious insitution and Yasukuni is practicing shinto, which is religion.
I have argued the the praying for the war-dead is a religious act because it involve the worship of the super-natural enitity.
It is not unusual for Japanse to worship the dead.
As someone pointed out, Japanese worship ancestry. Naturally they worship the dead.
And there is anotehr aspect to worship the dead.
When a car accident happen and someone was killed in front of your house, many Japanese would feel uneasy if they didn’t pray for the dead, or at least they would want to purify the place even if the man killed happend to be a cruel murderer.The killing happened in your sphere, some ritual must be done.
JAL airplane crashed at Osutaka mountain twenty years ago. People still visit Osutaka to pray for the dead. it might be there was a criminal killed in the accident. but people are not concerned about how they lived concerned about the fact they are killed unusual way.
So it makes sense Japanese want to pay tribute to the war-dead. PM is a Japanese.
It is even possible to see Yasukuni as the one where they enshrined whoever was killed in their sphere related to the crazy war game just as the cases I mentioned above.

The opponents of PM’s visit have argued the PM have no right to visit Yasukuni where A-criminals are enshrined.
It is really offensive if he worships the criminality of A-crimanals.
But few would worship the leaders like, for instance Mao, Sygmand Lyee, etc for that.
People visit Yasukuni to pray for the war dead, not to praise for their criminality.
PM, for instance, Koizumi explicity acceptted the judgement of Tokyo tial.

Some people link Yasukuni with the symbol of the religion that oppressed other religions. Christianity was like that,it used to burn people alive if the　peson turned out to be a pagan.Yasukuni was not doing things like that, but it is true there was a times where peole are forced to worship the shrine.(It is ironical that people are forced not to worship Yasukuni now.) But more than 60 years have passed since the practice stopped. A washing machine was a symbol of techonology just 50 years ago, but it is not anymore because it is not function as a tool to be called “techonology”.
Some people want to link the Japanese flag and national anthem with Japan’s mitarism and Yasukuni with the oppression no matter what; though there is no fact Japan has been militarist and yasukuni has been oppressing other religions for more than 60 years.
That is the very convinient way to attak the politicians. But I hope peope will not start attacking and oppressing Chrisitian politicians, Buddhist politicians like that.

I think they need to explain why they are justified in blaiming X, by linking it with Y, though X has had no function, no trait, no sign shared by Y for a long time;otherwise,people can blame something for what it functioned in the past for ever.

In my judement, China is playing the vital role in PM’s decision not to visit.
Nakasone quitted because of China’s request.
Cculutural difference make it harder for Chinese people to understand the ritual. Chinese spit on the crimial for thousands years, Japanese fear and worship the dead no matter who. It is vital to explain the meaning we give to the dead is different.
Besides, it is very convinient for China to exploit Yasukuni as their symbolic target of ultra nationalism. Nationalism is the CCP’s new ideology when few believe in communism. And when fueled by nationalism, rational explanatoin is hard to work.

Having said that it does not mean Yasukuni have made sufficient efforts to make misunderstanding cleared. Yasukuni can state clearly that the war is evil whoever iniated, which is the beliefs shared by almost all the Japanese people. and probably it can do much more, listening sincerely to the criticism;I believe that is a important prat of religion.

My conclusion is the same.
PM has the right to visit Yasukuni in private capacity.
It is desirable that he account for his action fully so that no body misunderstand he is praising the crimianality of the A-crime and people understand it is not unusual at all for Japanese to worhship the war-dead. But against hysterical wind, there is nothing you can do. In that sense, Abe’s tactics might have been not bad.
Political considerations comes in his decision as a matter of fact. He decides, everything ,icluding his religioius desire to vist, considerd.

I can understand the Japanese people who oppose PM’s visit. Whatever they say , their main concerns are international politics;Japan has been comformist and accomodating to the international tide of the times.
“I sencond X, I agree with Y” have been proved to be
useful way to survive. Kiss-the-big power’s ass no matter what have been proved to be sucessful.

That is important. I don’t dislike the idea.
Grangted there is a time when we have to kow-tow, it is important to see what is right and what is wrong
in the pressures from abroad.

.

Both are “Yes”.But I still say PM should suspend the Yasukuni visit.Since he can visit any shinto shrine in his own private capacity,Insisting on Yasukuni would means his primal motivation is not religious.

“You can not tell the difference from the outward behavior. And he said he visited Ise and Yasukuni to pray. To me it is reasonable to assume the both are religious act, because it involved praying for the super-natural entity.”

Then PM’s act is neither tranparent nor has enough accountability.

“If PM has the constitutional right, and yet it should be suspended, what is the compelling reason to
overturn his constitutional right. ”

If you are siting in a crowded train and see an elderly citizen come by,you may give the elderly the seat you are sitting,even though you may have legal right of sitting there for occupying it first.The announcement in the train is requiring that to the passengers even though that is against legal “rights”.Our society is made not just legal rights,certain measures must be taken fot the benefit of the society,that includes suspencion of certain rights by certain individuals in certain occasion.I think Yasukuni is such a case.

“You once made a claim to the effect if it is against the public interest, his right should be suspended. What is the public interest that justify the suspension of such a n strong right as his constitutional right to faith? ”

Our nation is build upon the number of political arrangements.Including constitution and San Fransisco Treaty that enables us to be the member of the international society we’ve once ostracized.Visiting Yasukuni by Japanese PM is against the broad wish and request from international community and giving the wrong impression of we are vioalting the spirit of SF treaty.It will disturb the fundamental value we state at the foundation of the post-war Japan,and that is against pulic interest in any measure.

“Do you call legal disputes religious feud?”

It is you who are bringing up the religious aspect of the PM’s right of visiting Yasukuni by bringing up the comparison with the Christianity,Buddhism and so on by stating Yasukuni is a “religion”.

“So he(Tachibana) needs to show why he is justified in linking PM’s visit with Tokyo trial and SF treaty, when people who visits Yasukuni rarely link Yasukuni with Tokyo trial and SF treaty and when PM explicitly say he accept the judgement of Tokyo trial and SF treaty.
They just want to console the souls of the war-dead.”

Yasukuni honors war criminals,Yuushukan writes in exhibit that they are matyrs.That is against the judgement of Tokyo trial.PM Abe did explicitly say he accept the jusgement of Tokyo trial and SF treaty only after he was criticized,No?Anyway when politicians say one thing and do something that seems paradoxal,they usually get criticized that may not happen to ordinary people,but happens to the politicians.

“If so, why is it you can worship the leaders under which innocent people were killed in China, and in Korea, but not in Japan?”

You are not a war criminal as long as you are not convicted in international court on war crime.Anyway,in Korea(South) there is memorial dedicated for the matyrs of Kuwangjyu massacre in Kuwangjyu and two ex-presidents were sentenced guilty in court for treason.
In Taiwan(Republic of China,that is)had recently removed some of Chiang Kai Shek pictures and renamed and changed the character of the National Chiang Kai Shek memorial hall into National Taiwan Democracy Hall,dedicating innocent people killed in Taiwan.
I see no action in China on these,but I also see no reason why we should have China as bench marking.

“Islam, Christianity, Buddhism organizations are not doing enough to change the current state of Japanese society. Do you call them cults?”

You are now making new claim,No I wouldn’t call them “cults”,and I wouldn’t claim they are not doing enough to change themselves in a manner of the current state of Japanese society,just as I wouldn’t say so with Shinto.You are confusing “a religion” and “a religious institution” again,either intentionally or unintentionally.

“In my opinion, their freedom to faith is guaranteed by the constitution just like the freedom to visit in private capacity any shrine including Yasukuni is guaranteed by the constitution.”

That still do not justifies PM visit to the Yasukuni.And if any of these politicians actually think that the current opinions against Yasukuni visit are violating their freedom guaranteed by the constitution,How come none of them bring this to the court?

The right protected by the article 20 is the freedom to faith, freedom to religious act, freedom to assemble religious organization.
PM does exactly the same act when he visits Ise shrine and when visit Yasukuni shrine.
You can not tell the difference from the outward behavior. And he said he visited Ise and Yasukuni to pray. To me it is reasonable to assume the both are religious act, because it involved praying for the super-natural entity.

(3)If PM has the constitutional right, and yet it should be suspended, what is the compelling reason to
overturn his constitutional right. You once made a claim to the effect if it is against the public interest, his right should be suspended. What is the public interest that justify the suspension of such a n strong right as his constitutional right to faith?

……………………………………………

I never said the public interest I mentioned here is “Chinese”public interest.

So what is it? I have asked you again and again.

The one like we’ve been discussing in the passing days. You know there are law suits that reach the supreme courts on these cases

Do you call legal disputes religious feud?

1)Tachibana is talking about Japan and Tokyo trial and Yasukuni and San Francisco treaty. Nothing else

So he needs to show why he is justified in linking PM’s visit with Tokyo trial and SF treaty, when people who visits Yasukuni rarely link Yasukuni with Tokyo trial and SF treaty and when PM explicitly say he accept the judgement of Tokyo trial and SF treaty.
They just want to console the souls of the war-dead.
When people just want to pray for the war-dead, and it is justified, and when PM says he just wants to pray for the war dead, it is not reasonable at all to infer that he is worshipping the criminality of A-criminal when he visit Yasukuni.

2)No American nor Chinese were convicted as international war criminal court.

Right, that does not mean that they can worship the crimes they committed, no? People are not worshipping the crimes people committed when they honor them. If so, why is it you can worship the leaders under which innocent people were killed in China, and in Korea, but not in Japan?

“You said PM is not included in “people” in the constitution”
Never.I said PM can not be included as “people” in ordinal sense,not constitutional sense.Quote me in that very phrase in the past comments if you can find it.

ponta 75

(1) Freedom to faith is guaranteed to all by the constitution.
(2) PM is included in “all”

For your reference:

Article 20:
1)
Freedom of religion is guaranteed to all. No religious organization shall receive any privileges from the State, nor exercise any political authority.
2)
No person shall be compelled to take part in any religious acts, celebration, rite or practice.
3)
The State and its organs shall refrain from religious education or any other religious activity.

Aceface 76

PM is not included in the “people”,for the reason I’ve said in above.

“A washing-machine was a symbol of a technology for a housewife, but it is not anymore.”

Because it is outdated now(It can be said it is a symbol of technology in the 60’s).But Yasukuni is not. It is still valid.

I disagree. But it is difficult either to affirm or negate the claim. So I let it be.

“創価学会、成長の家、ＰＬ教団、and other religious organization is not doing enough to change to meet the current state of Japanese society. Some politician visits their church to pray. No problem as far as it is done in private capacity.”

That’s why they are all considered as cults. And I do see problem with the politician associating with there religions. T hat is not constitutional, however it does effects ny voting behaviour.

My example was not good. Islam, Christianity, Buddhism organizations are not doing enough to change the current state of Japanese society. Do you call them cults?
And is politician associating with the religion not constitutional? If so, why? Do people win when they sue the politicians for the violation of the constitution?
If you mean, politician associating with the religion not unconstitutional, then why it is not unconstitutional?
In my opinion, their freedom to faith is guaranteed by the constitution just like the freedom to visit in private capacity any shrine including Yasukuni is guaranteed by the constitution.

That’s not what I’ve said.This is not the problem of religious faith.

“you need the compelling reason. but he/she has not articulated what the public interest he/she has in mind to overturn PM’s right ;at best the public interest is Chinese public interest.”

I never said the public interest I mentioned here is “Chinese”public interst.

“I thought you admitted Yasukuni was the religious institution. A change of mind? So what is your argument for your new claim yasukuni is not religion”

Yasukuni is the religious INSTITUTION.Itelf is not practicing it’s own religion.It is practicing Shinto.There are many shonto shrine all over the country and nobody is prohibiting PM to visit there at his or her private capacity.There is no change of mind on my side not new claim presented here.

“In my view, there might be a time that PM should visit Yasukuni for a political reason when for instance, he/she see it fit to destabilize Chinese domestic situation. A state man needs to hold every card in his/her hand.”

I thought you were promoting PM’s constitutional rights,not to destabilize Chinese domestic situation.New claim?Anyway I don’t see Chinese domestic situation is being destabilized by Yasukuni visits,instead it had some political feud here.

“Now Yasukuni is religious institution, a change of mind again?”

That’s what I have been saying from the very beginning.It is YOU,who are saying “Yasukuni is a religion”.

“In the same sense, those people I cited are responsible for that and yet honored, and no problem arises., because its people are not praising the evil aspect they brought about, and people know it.
I am expanding the context to see the peculiar context Japanese are facing. Unfortunately it seems you are not aware of it.”

I am very much aware of it.That is why I’m not offending people going to Yasukuni for tributing their war buddys.My criticism is solely upon Yasukuni shrine itself and the politician,especially PM going there.

“You said PM is not included in “people” in the constitution”
Never.I said PM can not be included as “people” in ordinal sense,not constituional sense.Quote me in that very phrase in the past comments if you can find it.

“A washing-machine was a symbol of a technology for a housewife, but it is not anymore.”

Because it is outdated now(It can be said it is a symbol of technology in the 60’s).But Yasukuni is not.It is still valid.

“The general public does not give a damn about Yasukuni. People know it is a shrine for the war dead in general, and people are aware that there is a controversy”

If they are aware that there is a controversy,then you could say there is a concern based on the negative public image that circulates both inside and outside of the country.

“And if Yasukuni has such a evil image, why not the people protest just as they did against OM”

Some do.

“創価学会、成長の家、ＰＬ教団、and other religious organization is not doing enough to change to meet the current state of Japanese society. Some politician visits their church to pray. No problem as far as it is done in private capacity.”

That’s why they are all considered as cults.And I do see problem with the politician associating with there religions.That is not constitutional,however it does effects ny voting behaviour.

“But what is RELIGIOUS FEUD you are talking about?”

The one like we’ve been discudding in the passing days.You know there are law suits that reach the supreme courts on these cases.

“IAceface said)Well, Sometimes rights aren’t right, and lefts aren’t wrong.”
“That is true. But in this particular case, the argument was wrong. ”

That’s your opinion,not mine.

“he(Tachibana) also needs to explain why the visit Arlington does not counts as the affirmation of the Vietnam war, why visiting Mao
museum does not count as the praise of culutual revolution.etc.”

1)Tachibana is talking about Japan and Tokyo trial and Yasukuni and San Francisco treaty.Nothing else
2)No American nor Chinese were convicted as international war crimina court.
3)Lack of historical clarity in certain issue in Chinese history in 20th century is differnt topic and that too is under criticism from (mostly)abroad.But that is not what Tachibana is accusing in this short piece devoted for PM’s Yasukuni visit.

“My point is when you present the thesis, you need to back it up with reasons. when your reason is criticized, you need to answer with reason. You can not just repeat the old claim”

That is what I have been doing in this series of comments.Aren’t you the one with repeating the “old”claim,because you keep finding new one in my post.

“It is as a bad taste as Tomoijro’s and as bad as me saying nobody’s calling you a troll ….yet either.”

And I repeat again.Neither Tomojiro nor I had called anyone a “troll”….Yet.

(1)PM has no right to visit Yasukuni
(1′)PM and politicians has no right to visit Yasukuni

(2)PM has right to visit Yasukuni but his right should be suspended during his term. In other word,
he can not visit Yasukuni even if he wants to visit.
(2′)PM and politicians’ right should be suspended..

(3)PM has right to visit Yasukuni in private capacity;he can visit Yasukuni if he wants to. Political considerations come in his decision to visit Yasukuni.

Aceface holds (1)~(2′)
((1) and (2) are inconsistent;(1) says he has no right, (2) says he has a right)
I hold (3).

Aceface repeats NO Yasukuni!!
In my view, his/her reasons— for prohibiting PM and politician from visiting Yasukuni may work in the weighing on his decision .
I have argued against (1) citing the constitution.
In Aceface’s view, PM is not included in “people”:I know the theory that “the emperor” is not included in “people” but Aceface’s theory is new:I am not convinced. Because we are here talking about the freedom to faith defined by the constitution. According to Aceface, PM has no right to believe in Christianity, Buddhism, Shinto, etc. It seems to me that is absurd.
On another occasion, Aceface says, PM has a right, but his right should be suspended. To suspend such a strong right as freedom to faith, you need the compelling reason. but he/she has not articulated what the public interest he/she has in mind to overturn PM’s right ;at best the public interest is Chinese public interest.

What we see problem is a religious institution called Yasukuni, not the religion shinto

I thought you admitted Yasukuni was the religious institution. A change of mind? So what is your argument for your new claim yasukuni is not religion,
is not practicing shinto religion?

I’m not accusing ordinary people going to Yasukuni just as you had admitted that I said so .Why are you back “stepping?

Because I am talking PM’s visit in private capacity.
And you haven’t argued that PM can not visit religious place to pray in private capacity trasparent to public, just as when he visist Buddhist temple for funeral in private capacity.

“PM can do nothing about the fact that A-criminals are enshrined and the fact the descriptions of history at Yusyuukan are not appropriate.”

Then he should not go to Yasukuni.君子危うきに近寄るべからず

君子危うきに近寄るべからず is a good advise, but it can comes in his decision, but it is not strong enough as
a reason for the claim that he has no right, his right
should be suspended.
In my view, there might be a time that PM should visit Yasukuni for a political reason when for instance, he/she see it fit to destabilize Chinese domestic situation. A state man needs to hold every card in his/her hand.

No. They are not in the similar conditions. The memorial place for the war dead of China, Korea and the U.S are basically non^religious institution unlike Yasukuni.

Now Yasukuni is religious institution, a change of mind again?
You are attacking Yasukuni because it enshrined the war criminals, in particular those leaders who were responsible for the invasion, and the death of civilians. In the same sense, those people I cited are responsible for that and yet honored, and no problem arises., because its people are not praising the evil aspect they brought about, and people know it.

I am expanding the context to see the peculiar context Japanese are facing. Unfortunately it seems you are not aware of it.

When I said PM has no right to go to Yasukuni, I did not intended to mean in a strict legal sense

You said PM is not included in “people” in the constitution. That is strictly legal argument.And you said you were aware I was talking of the constitutional right.

You should’ve take one more look at what you’ve been writing.

Thank you. I’ll do it. But that is what I am asking you to do. I am enjoying the discussion, it helps brush up my argument. Remember I don’t give a damn if PM does not visit Yasukuni. I don’t visit Yasukuni. I have no reason to stick to my position if i find the more convincing argument against it.

Once a symbol, always a symbol.

A washing-machine was a symbol of a technology for a housewife, but it is not anymore.

Yasukuni has still a long way to go to renew it’s public image.

Which public image? As the place for cherry blossom? the place for dating place? The general public does not give a damn about Yasukuni. People know it is a shrine for the war dead in general, and people are aware that there is a controversy, but it is not clear if it is an symbol of Japanese nationalism among Japanese people; To me Japanese nationalism is a mirage now. There is no significant nationalist movement in Japan. Even a Japanese nationalist like you are against PM’s visit to Yasukuni for the reason Chinese gives, citing Japan as a house of glass for another reason.

And if Yasukuni has such a evil image, why not the people protest just as they did against OM.

It is mainly symbolic target for Chinese nationalist.

.“Your new claim is that Yasukuni is the symbol of the religion that is not doing enough to change t meet the current state of Japanese society, is that it?
Does that matter? Many organizations are like that.”

Yes It does. And many organization(Self Defense Force,Police,Imperial family”had tried hard to overcome the negative past. And many organization(Self Defense Force,Police,Imperial family”had tried hard to overcome the negative past.

創価学会、成長の家、ＰＬ教団、and other religious organization is not doing enough to change to meet the current state of Japanese society. Some politician visits their church to pray. No problem as far as it is done in private capacity.

Not really, I’m a Japanese nationalist. and I was saying No Yasukuni, NO RELIGIOUS FEUD. You are editing my comments to match the need of your criticism

But what is RELIGIOUS FEUD you are talking about?

Well, Sometimes rights aren’t right, and lefts aren’t wrong.

That is true. But in this particular case, the argument was wrong.

Tachibana meant to say is if Tokyo denies the Tokyo trial and San Francisco treaty(of which Japan had accepted the judgement at the Tokyo trials in written words)the fundamental foundation of the bilateral relation with the U.S would be threatened

Thank you. That helped. so what Tachibana failed to show was why PM’s private visit counts as the denial of Tokyo trial regardless of the clear statement to the contrary, for that matter, he also needs to explain why the visit Arlington does not counts as the affirmation of the Vietnam war, why visiting Mao
museum does not count as the praise of culutual revolution.etc.

Ponta.
No one here is calling you a “troll”….Yet.

Do you like this kind of rhetoric, Aceface?
By saying “Yet” you are insinuating that that something is prepared to call me a toll.
It is as a bad taste as Tomoijro’s and as bad as me saying nobody’s calling you a troll ….yet either.

Anyway, you missed the point again. My point is when you present the thesis, you need to back it up with reasons. when your reason is criticized, you need to answer with reason. You can not just repeat the old claim. Is it a troll in your dictionary?
And the argument holds whoever said it.
when some call you a toll without reason, it is a emotional respond. And it is an emotioal resopond whoever said it. Did I make myself clear?

Therefore, it is natural that Chinese, or Americans, feel embitterment, suspecting that they are not learning from history, or at least they are discourtious. Emperor decided not to visit Yasukuni because of this notion.

However, it is not militarism that lead PMs to Yasukuni. They are simply expressing national pride. The war leaders, for all errors and possible misdoings, lead the nation selflessly. For all the misery of a lost war, we must at least inwardly thank them. The feeling that Chinese may feel against Mao, or Russians against Stalin.

MacArthur decided not to kill Emperor, the most responsible for the war, because he was not a rogue but personally a noble man. Similarly, Japanese cannot blame the A-criminals for all Americans and Chinese claim.

This kind of ancestor, or history-maker, worshipping has united Japan for centuries. Japanese can understand the discourtesy against Chinese, of course, but they cannot simply disrespect and forget their one-time leaders of nation building.

“PM can do nothing about the fact that A-criminals are enshrined and the fact the descriptions of history at Yusyuukan are not appropriate.”

Then he should not go to Yasukuni.君子危うきに近寄るべからず

”If you want attack the fact, you should attack Yasukuni.( In this regard, I am glad Aceface has changed his/her opinion;He/She used to say, in response to my suggestion to attack Yasukuni, “As long as the Yasukuni shrine is in charge of managing the Yusyukan and hold responsibility of the exhibit, that can not be done.” but he/she now says that is what she/he is doing.）”

Now waaait a minuite,Ponta.That was in response to YOUR suggestion of”attack “Yuusyukan”.And I said “Yusyukan and Yasukuni are inseparable”.And you said “attack Yasukuni but not the people who go there”,and I said “I never criticized ordinary people going there.”No?

“What we are finding out ,and what you are turning an blind eye is the fact they are treated differently regardless of the similar conditions.
In case of Buddhism, Christianity, Mao, Sygmond Lyee,etc, you are saying that is okay for the head of the state to visit the place its religious place or the place they are honored, but when it comes to Yasukuni, you just think PM’s visit is no, no.”

No.They are not in the similar conditions.The memorial place for the wardead of China,Korea and the U.S are basically non^religious institution unlike Yasukuni.

“What is the public interest that can override PM’s freedom to faith?”

What exactly is in benefit of having a PM that has higher priority in his or her own personal freedom that overrides the public interest?PM is a political figure.It is in the interest of the people to watch over the use of the power by the most powerful man in Japanese political world.

“I(Aceface)said many times if politicians wish to fullfill there religious need in their private capacity they can always go to anyothere shrine,but Yasukuni.

Yes, you did, you have repeated the same claim without responding the criticism. ”

I just did,And so I did in the past comments.

“the point is whether his right to visit Yasukuni should be restricted. You said at one time, if I remember correctly, PM has no right to visit Yasukuni, the visiting Yasukuni is not included in the fundamental right, you also said at another time that his right should be suspended. These are different claims and anyway I refuted them both. I am afraid you are just repeating I-just-think-blah-blah-blah”
“And you are claiming more. You are claiming that there is no right for PM to visit Yasukui because Yasukuni is not doing doing enough to change to meet the current state of Japanese society. I have argued the blaiming people including the head of the state for visting Church, Shrine etc because there are some aspect to blame about their religion is misdirected.”

“Aceface sometimes says he has no right, other times says his right should be suspended.”

When I said PM has no right to go to Yasukuni,I did not intended to mean in a strict legal sense,but as the way of the word,like “You have no right to say that to me”.
and since you start bringing up constitutional rights and all,I step back a little.Still that may be different,the conclusion is unchanged.What you are doing is pointless nit-picking.

Anyway I wouldn’t throw any stones at opponent if I were sitting in a house of glass as you are now.You should’ve take one more look at what you’ve been writing.

“You claim was that “Yasukuni was the symbol of state Shinto that had oppressed this country’s religious freedom in the past.”
Yasukuni is not doing that at all now.
So what is your claim now?”

Once a symbol,always a symbol.Yasukuni has still a long way to go to renew it’s public image.

“Your new claim is that Yasukuni is the symbol of the religion that is not doing enough to change t meet the current state of Japanese society, is that it?
Does that matter? Many organizations are like that.”

Yes It does.And many organization(Self Defense Force,Police,Imperial family”had tried hard to overcome the negative past.

“So I say again.No yasukuni visits,

Just like Chinese nationalists.”

No.Not really,I’m a Japanese nationalist.and I was saying No Yasukuni,NO RELIGIOUS FEUD.You are editting my comments to match the need of your criticism(or to be more exact,a retort).
That is an all too usual petty tactic of Chinese Communist Party,If you ask me.

“(Aceface said)That is simply Abe choose not to visit and Takaichi is not much of a politician to speak of.”

“Wait, you claim was ” Politicians should stay away from the religious disputes,to maintain secularism of the society.”
Takaichi is a politician, and the minister.
So let me cofirm your new claim. your claim now is that politicians has a freedom to visit Yasukuni but PM and the only PM has no freedom to visit Yasukuni, Is that it?”

No.It is the response to your “Besides, when Takaichi visited Yasukuni this time , there was no dispute to speak of”. Takaichi is a small fish.ABe is (relatively)a big fish.Abe matters,Takaichi does not.

“And what is the religious disputes when Abe and Takaishi visit Yasukuni?”

To us official visit to religious institution threatens secularism of the society,To foreign countries,it is not religious.But historical feud.Anyway this dispute is deadend.So I say it is in the interest of the society that elected politicians not to go to Yasukuni.

“Unfortunately the structure of the argument as for the point is the same(as the left wings).”

Well,Sometimes rights aren’t right,and lefts aren’t wrong.

“does he mean to say that Japan should accept whatever the U.S. says about a historical issue just as the resolution 121? My view is Japan should respond appropriately, point out the distortion, explain what really happened, what Japan did to compensate it.”

What Tachibana meant to say is if Tokyo denies the Tokyo trial and San Francisco treaty(of which Japan had accepted the judgement at the Tokyo trials in written words)the fundamental foundation of the bilateral relation with the U.S would be threatend.

T”he counter-argument is the logical attack with another reason against the reason presented by the opponent. And they constitute a debate, a discussion. Calling someone a troll, calling a argument is herikutu without argument is not counter-argument. Repeating you opinion without reasons, without responding the criticism is not a discussion.”

That seems to be a good sum-up of the situation we are now in.and one thing Ponta.
No one here is calling you a “troll”….Yet.

I think you need arguments thatbecause Yasukuni denies the criminality of A-criminals rather than because they are dead in relation to the war and
→
I think you need arguments that　they are enshrined because Yasukuni denies the criminality of A-criminals rather than because they are dead in relation to the war and…

if Japan made the issue the indicriminatate bombing, a historical issue, the first priority in politics,
→
if Japan made the indicriminatate bombing, a historical issue, the first priority in politics…,