Why is US education so poor on WW2 in Asia/the Pacific?

[Anonymous]

Part of the answer to your question is that the main U.S. effort went to defeating the Germans. In terms of their success and brutality, the world had not seen anything like the German army since Genghis Khan. And Genghis Khan did not have death camps, as far as I know. The Japanese forces were just not a threat (to the U.S.) on the same level as the Germans.

That being said, I do agree that the Japanese have been let off the hook for many of the brutalities they committed during the war. I doubt many Americans know that they enslaved and tortured American POWs and even performed Dr. Mengele-like experiments on them.

[Anonymous]

A couple of issues. World history is vast and, unless you just cover as much as possible at a fairly superficial level, you ultimately have to be selective about what you teach. Secondly, you need to consider whether the purpose of teaching history is to impart specific knowledge about historic events or to teach particular skills like analysis, comparison, critiquing, etc. For example, my DS started at WIS last year and one of the units he studied in history was Revolutions. So I guess you could describe the approach as thematic. I think they basically compared and contrasted three revolutions - the US, Haiti and another (maybe France?). Potentially, you could have switched and studied revolutions in three other countries as the ultimate idea was to compare and contrast rather than related to the specific events.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:World history here also doesn't teach about the violence that the Koreans inflicted on to Vietnamese women during the Vietnam war.

https://laidaihanjustice.org/who-are-the-lai-dai-han/

Point being, there is not enough time to teach all the details of everything that went on, whether you deem some more worthy of notice or not.
Given the founding of this country, obviously the US is going to focus more on its own country's history and US/European history compared to things that have happened elsewhere in the world.

There the point. US role in Asia was massive and more important to defeating the Japanese than the importance of the US in defeating the Nazis. And the Japanese were just as bad, if not worse than the Nazis in many ways. War in Asia is fundamental to US history and we had a very committed people like General Chennault who dedicated his life and forces to protecting China.

The major difference is that we didn't put Hirohito on trial and almost immediately called the Japanese an ally. Germany was divided and given governments that did everything possible to distance themselves from the Nazis. Japanese atrocities were down played and Nazi atrocities were highlighted

The allies, including the US, did put many dozens of Imperial Japanese generals and other leaders on trial for war crimes who were sentenced to death or life in prison during the Tokyo and other war crimes trials. It's a myth the Japanese were not prosecuted. Over 1000 were executed after the war.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:World history here also doesn't teach about the violence that the Koreans inflicted on to Vietnamese women during the Vietnam war.

https://laidaihanjustice.org/who-are-the-lai-dai-han/

Point being, there is not enough time to teach all the details of everything that went on, whether you deem some more worthy of notice or not.
Given the founding of this country, obviously the US is going to focus more on its own country's history and US/European history compared to things that have happened elsewhere in the world.

There the point. US role in Asia was massive and more important to defeating the Japanese than the importance of the US in defeating the Nazis. And the Japanese were just as bad, if not worse than the Nazis in many ways. War in Asia is fundamental to US history and we had a very committed people like General Chennault who dedicated his life and forces to protecting China.

The major difference is that we didn't put Hirohito on trial and almost immediately called the Japanese an ally. Germany was divided and given governments that did everything possible to distance themselves from the Nazis. Japanese atrocities were down played and Nazi atrocities were highlighted

The allies, including the US, did put many dozens of Imperial Japanese generals and other leaders on trial for war crimes who were sentenced to death or life in prison during the Tokyo and other war crimes trials. It's a myth the Japanese were not prosecuted. Over 1000 were executed after the war.

Sure, but we were careful to insulate the Emperor and place blame on the army and navy that we had disbanded

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Part of the answer to your question is that the main U.S. effort went to defeating the Germans. In terms of their success and brutality, the world had not seen anything like the German army since Genghis Khan. And Genghis Khan did not have death camps, as far as I know. The Japanese forces were just not a threat (to the U.S.) on the same level as the Germans.

That being said, I do agree that the Japanese have been let off the hook for many of the brutalities they committed during the war. I doubt many Americans know that they enslaved and tortured American POWs and even performed Dr. Mengele-like experiments on them.

Not true at all. Japanese barbarism was so bad at areas like Nanking it disgusted even the Nazis. The Japanese used to cut off peoples arms and legs and use live torsos for bayonet practice. They were ungodly barbaric in Singapore, Shanghai, Manila, and especially in the Andamans/Dutch East Indies. The Japanese too had death camps with appalling conditions that were arguably even worse than what the Nazis ran. In fact, more Americans were held in Japanese death camps that the numbers held in Nazi death camps.

How in the world were the Japanese not a threat to the US? They friggin' bombed pearl harbor. They actually hit mainland US with bombs dropped by balloons that even killed a few US citizens. There are historical records of FDR sweating bullets because the US govt anticipated a west coast invsion of the US and the govt believed that the Japanese might not be able to be stopped until they reached Chicago. It's a complete myth the Germans were more barbaric or were more of a threat.

[Anonymous]

This is why so many of us are fighting for AAP courses for our kids. Gen ed is painfully slow and doesn't have the depth needed.

I was in AP and I did learn a lot about the Japanese. Also, the National WW2 history museum in New Orleans does have a large focus on the Pacific. I know a lot of people visiting were confused and really only think of Europe in regards to WW2.

[Anonymous]

OP, I agree that the atrocities were equal if not worse.

A couple of reasons why we hear more about Europe:
1) we occupied it after the war
2) More Americans feel a connection to Europe than Asia (at least in the post-war period, demographics have changed a lot since)
3) More Americans had family and friends affected by the Holocaust and they and their families and descendants have made a huge effort in educating the public on what happened.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Part of the answer to your question is that the main U.S. effort went to defeating the Germans. In terms of their success and brutality, the world had not seen anything like the German army since Genghis Khan. And Genghis Khan did not have death camps, as far as I know. The Japanese forces were just not a threat (to the U.S.) on the same level as the Germans.

That being said, I do agree that the Japanese have been let off the hook for many of the brutalities they committed during the war. I doubt many Americans know that they enslaved and tortured American POWs and even performed Dr. Mengele-like experiments on them.

Not true at all. Japanese barbarism was so bad at areas like Nanking it disgusted even the Nazis. The Japanese used to cut off peoples arms and legs and use live torsos for bayonet practice. They were ungodly barbaric in Singapore, Shanghai, Manila, and especially in the Andamans/Dutch East Indies. The Japanese too had death camps with appalling conditions that were arguably even worse than what the Nazis ran. In fact, more Americans were held in Japanese death camps that the numbers held in Nazi death camps.

How in the world were the Japanese not a threat to the US? They friggin' bombed pearl harbor. They actually hit mainland US with bombs dropped by balloons that even killed a few US citizens. There are historical records of FDR sweating bullets because the US govt anticipated a west coast invsion of the US and the govt believed that the Japanese might not be able to be stopped until they reached Chicago. It's a complete myth the Germans were more barbaric or were more of a threat.

I don't think you actually read what I said. But let me try again:

U.S. Forces killed in Europe–Atlantic Theatre 183,588
U.S. Forces killed in Asia–Pacific Theatre 108,504

So, about 63% of the deaths were in Europe, which speaks to the level of American power directed at each country. And in terms of the Japanese invading, neither Japan nor Germany had the resources to invade the U.S. Invading France across the English Channel was nearly impossible. Anyway who talks about invading the U.S. across the Pacific or Atlantic is not a serious person.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It drives me bonkers when you ask the simple question of "When did WW2 start?" and you get the typical answer of 1939 when Hitler invaded Poland. That's completely wrong, because the Japanese attacked China even 2 years before that in 1937 and committed many atrocities even long before Hitler even touched Poland. In fact, you could even argue they WW2 started even earlier in 1931 when the Japanese invaded Manchuria, or as far back as even 1910 when they invaded Korea and were trying to wipe out their entire culture.

The US entered WW2 in Europe late, and played second fiddle to the Russians at defeating Germany. All you're ever taught is how important DDay was, yet in the grand scheme of the war, the Battle of Stalingrad was much more important for breaking Germany's back. Meanwhile in Asia, the US was arguably at war with Japan long before we were at war with Germany (arguably even before Pearl Harbor) and the US played a much, much more significant role in defeating the other major Axis power which were the Japanese compared to r role we played in defeating the Nazis.

We are all taught about the SS, 3rd Reich, Hitler's Arayan race views and all of the deaths due to the Holocaust, but the Japanese had the same exact things with the Kempei Tai, the Greater East Asian Co-prosperity Sphere, their beliefs that they were the superior race, and the Asian holocaust where the Japanese were murdering millions of civilians all across Asia and literally used to terms like exterminate wrt things like the entire Korean race and culture.

I mean our schools probably teach some of the major battles like Midway and Pearl Harbor, discuss dropping of the nukes, and the Rape of Nanking/Korean comfort women, but they only begins to scratch the surface of WW2 in Asia and all of the horrific crimes committed by Japan. A single event like flooding of the Yellow River killed 500k-1M Chinese, yet all you ever learn are Russia scortched Earth policies. Everyone learns about Josef Mengele and Nazi human testing, yet the Japanese did the same and worse with Unit 731 and were even dropping biological weapons on China like 'maggot bombs' designed to spread cholera they killed 200k in Yunnan.

It just boggles the mind how poor US education is wrt WW2 and why US education always focuses on Europe when jit as many, if not, more people died in Asia depending on what time frames you look at, the Japanese were just as bad, if not worse than the Nazis, and the US had a far more fundamental role in defeating the Japanese compared to the role the US played in defeating the Germans. US schools should be spending 60-75% of time about WW2 on what happened in Asia and the rest on Europe given how much more the US was important in Asia compared to Europe. The foundations of education on WW2 were probably driven by so much ethnocentrism even though the Marine Corps and Army were allobe the place in The Pacific, China, India, Burma, Dutch East Indies, etc.

That’s how I teach it. But I dont teach US History

[Anonymous]

I don't think I've ever heard about most of this. All the history classes restart so far back that I barely remember getting past WW2. And, yes, it was almost all focused on Europe.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:OP, I agree that the atrocities were equal if not worse.

A couple of reasons why we hear more about Europe:
1) we occupied it after the war
2) More Americans feel a connection to Europe than Asia (at least in the post-war period, demographics have changed a lot since)
3) More Americans had family and friends affected by the Holocaust and they and their families and descendants have made a huge effort in educating the public on what happened.

We occupied Japan as well

[Anonymous]

I could not agree more. My grandmother endured some unrepeatable experiences when the Japanese invaded her Asian homeland which her children witnessed.

As a parent I struggle with the lack of coverage about WWII and Asia in schools. When I mention my family's experience I am often met with a blank stare and a comment of "well it isn't as bad as what Hitler did" and this is coming from my children. It is almost as if "well my teacher did not say anything so did it really happen?".

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Part of the answer to your question is that the main U.S. effort went to defeating the Germans. In terms of their success and brutality, the world had not seen anything like the German army since Genghis Khan. And Genghis Khan did not have death camps, as far as I know. The Japanese forces were just not a threat (to the U.S.) on the same level as the Germans.

That being said, I do agree that the Japanese have been let off the hook for many of the brutalities they committed during the war. I doubt many Americans know that they enslaved and tortured American POWs and even performed Dr. Mengele-like experiments on them.

Not true at all. Japanese barbarism was so bad at areas like Nanking it disgusted even the Nazis. The Japanese used to cut off peoples arms and legs and use live torsos for bayonet practice. They were ungodly barbaric in Singapore, Shanghai, Manila, and especially in the Andamans/Dutch East Indies. The Japanese too had death camps with appalling conditions that were arguably even worse than what the Nazis ran. In fact, more Americans were held in Japanese death camps that the numbers held in Nazi death camps.

How in the world were the Japanese not a threat to the US? They friggin' bombed pearl harbor. They actually hit mainland US with bombs dropped by balloons that even killed a few US citizens. There are historical records of FDR sweating bullets because the US govt anticipated a west coast invsion of the US and the govt believed that the Japanese might not be able to be stopped until they reached Chicago. It's a complete myth the Germans were more barbaric or were more of a threat.

I don't think you actually read what I said. But let me try again:

U.S. Forces killed in Europe–Atlantic Theatre 183,588
U.S. Forces killed in Asia–Pacific Theatre 108,504

So, about 63% of the deaths were in Europe, which speaks to the level of American power directed at each country. And in terms of the Japanese invading, neither Japan nor Germany had the resources to invade the U.S. Invading France across the English Channel was nearly impossible. Anyway who talks about invading the U.S. across the Pacific or Atlantic is not a serious person.

Casualties don't mean squat. We had massive amount of equipment from Aircraft carriers, to planes, to marines all directed at Asia. THE ENTIRE MANHATTAN PROJECT BUILT A BINB DROPPED ON JAPAN. The number of US casualties in the Pacific theater was slightly lower than Europe only because of the US' vast technical superiority over the Japanese. In terms of Iives lost, however, the Pacific theater and Asia was just as bad, if not worse than Europe if you actually count Japan's invasion as Manchuria. Percentage wise, the US destroyed far more of Japanese forces than the German military. WW2 in Europe was primarily won with Russian blood. The US was far more instrumental in liberating the entire other half of the globe.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It drives me bonkers when you ask the simple question of "When did WW2 start?" and you get the typical answer of 1939 when Hitler invaded Poland. That's completely wrong, because the Japanese attacked China even 2 years before that in 1937 and committed many atrocities even long before Hitler even touched Poland. In fact, you could even argue they WW2 started even earlier in 1931 when the Japanese invaded Manchuria, or as far back as even 1910 when they invaded Korea and were trying to wipe out their entire culture.

The US entered WW2 in Europe late, and played second fiddle to the Russians at defeating Germany. All you're ever taught is how important DDay was, yet in the grand scheme of the war, the Battle of Stalingrad was much more important for breaking Germany's back. Meanwhile in Asia, the US was arguably at war with Japan long before we were at war with Germany (arguably even before Pearl Harbor) and the US played a much, much more significant role in defeating the other major Axis power which were the Japanese compared to r role we played in defeating the Nazis.

We are all taught about the SS, 3rd Reich, Hitler's Arayan race views and all of the deaths due to the Holocaust, but the Japanese had the same exact things with the Kempei Tai, the Greater East Asian Co-prosperity Sphere, their beliefs that they were the superior race, and the Asian holocaust where the Japanese were murdering millions of civilians all across Asia and literally used to terms like exterminate wrt things like the entire Korean race and culture.

I mean our schools probably teach some of the major battles like Midway and Pearl Harbor, discuss dropping of the nukes, and the Rape of Nanking/Korean comfort women, but they only begins to scratch the surface of WW2 in Asia and all of the horrific crimes committed by Japan. A single event like flooding of the Yellow River killed 500k-1M Chinese, yet all you ever learn are Russia scortched Earth policies. Everyone learns about Josef Mengele and Nazi human testing, yet the Japanese did the same and worse with Unit 731 and were even dropping biological weapons on China like 'maggot bombs' designed to spread cholera they killed 200k in Yunnan.

It just boggles the mind how poor US education is wrt WW2 and why US education always focuses on Europe when jit as many, if not, more people died in Asia depending on what time frames you look at, the Japanese were just as bad, if not worse than the Nazis, and the US had a far more fundamental role in defeating the Japanese compared to the role the US played in defeating the Germans. US schools should be spending 60-75% of time about WW2 on what happened in Asia and the rest on Europe given how much more the US was important in Asia compared to Europe. The foundations of education on WW2 were probably driven by so much ethnocentrism even though the Marine Corps and Army were allobe the place in The Pacific, China, India, Burma, Dutch East Indies, etc.

In general, the European perspective is taught more because the US was settled by Europeans and so has had as a European focus to its history.

The nature of teaching social studies/history in K to 12 varies by state. Examples I have heard of from friends and relatives is that there’s more about the Pacific theater taught in California, more about the Alamo taught in Texas, more about the Kansas Missouri compromise taught in Kansas, more about the French and Indian War taught in upstate New York and more about the early settlements taught in Massachusetts and Virginia.

[Anonymous]

Suggest you Google the term "whataboutism." Japanese atrocities do not make the German barbarism any more acceptable. read about the Battle of the Bulge.

US Air Force general says we are headed for all out war with China in two years. We will soon be at a place where we will welcome a resurgence of Japanese militarism and hatred of China.