7 ms·

Japan's Cute Army

69 points by coloneltcb 11y ago

fluxquanta 11y ago
Seeing how anime culture has permeated the military in Japan makes me wonder if anime/manga/games like Strike Witches[0], Kancolle[1], and Girls und Panzer[2] are strictly for entertainment purposes or if they are in part developed as a recruitment tool? [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strike_Witches https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strike_Witches [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kantai_Collection https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kantai_Collection [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Girls_und_Panzer https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Girls_und_Panzer Edit: As I read more of the article I see it mentions "Combined Fleet Girls Collection" which is the Kancolle I referenced.
- an_ko 11y ago
  > recruitment tool Are Counter Strike, Battlefield and their ilk in the west "recruitment tools"? Nah. Fiction involving military is still just fiction and implies little about its purpose. All those examples are definitely entertaining though.
  - fluxquanta 11y ago
    While Counter Strike and Battlefield in particular aren't used as recruitment tools, the US military has (albeit overtly) gotten involved in video games in the past[0], so it's not outside the realm of possibility. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/America%27s_Army https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/America%27s_Army
njharman 11y ago
I would bet a large part (or all of it) is that anime and cartoons and toys aren't seen as toys, as things just for children, it is normal adult interest. Much anime is very adult and dark. Other anime is war filled. It's no different than painting pin-up girls on on your B-17. Also, btw, US Cartoons bugs, daffy, woodpecker are not uncommon nose art subjects. google "bugs bunny nose art".
- jordigh 11y ago
  > it is normal adult interest. Is it really? How intimate are you with Japanese culture? I am skeptical that Japanese people generally view anime with the same reverence that they view the works of Akira Kurosawa or Natsume Soseki. edit: okay, anime is serious business.
  - sp332 11y ago
    You don't have to be Kurosawa to be a "normal adult interest".
  - deleted 11y ago
    [deleted]
  - fluxquanta 11y ago
    It is its own medium of entertainment and the content can vary wildly between different intellectual properties depending on the target audience. Pigeon-holing anime as being "for kids only" is like watching a Pixar production and saying that all American movies are "for kids only". The difference between intended audiences is more easily observed when you look at manga (comic books, often adapted to anime if successful) rather than just the animated cartoons, since the language used in manga directly reflects the target demographic. Plenty of manga are directed at an older audience and will use harder, more complicated kanji (Chinese characters), with or without furigana (helper text in a simpler alphabet) than those directed toward children.
  - ics 11y ago
    My partner's parents and grandparents watch anime, read manga, and her parents definitely game way more than us (PC, iPhone, and handheld PS/Nintendo/...). It's a casual activity like reading a book or watching TV, not just for techies/geeks/nerds/etc. But to address any concerns about value to society, they do hold Katsuhiro Otomo's Akira on a pretty high pedestal. Not the same as Kurosawa, but why should that matter? Edited to add: both her and my parents are roughly the same age and share many interests in art/media/culture. Mine are from the US and were adults by the time Pong came out; despite the explosion of media in recent years I don't think the type of content they look for is much different than it would be otherwise. South Park might be the only exception.
NoGravitas 11y ago
> This stressful, ongoing debate fuels the seeming paradox of an “endearing” military force. In Japan, where indirect communication is highly valued, cute illustrations have long played the role of tension-breakers and mediators in situations of conflict. Thus kawaii mascots, whether miniskirted girls or bunny-rabbit decoy launchers, are both a reflection of pop-cultural trends and a way to defuse the very touchy issues surrounding the military’s undeniable presence. Contrast this to the way [The Culture][0] dealt with their ambivalence over having to tool up to fight a full-scale war (the Idiran War). They specifically designed their warships to be ugly, and gave them ship class names reflecting the ugliness of their roles (e.g. Gangster, Torturer, Psychopath, and Thug). While depicting your weapons as kawaii is very different from depicting them as heroic/inspiring, I think the Culture's lack of euphemism is the better way to go. [0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Culture https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Culture
- nova 11y ago
  On the other hand, The Culture is just sci-fi, while Japan exists.
- dkbrk 11y ago
  This is a very good point, but I think the Japanese way might actually be better. The problem is that emphasising brutality and ugliness in the style of the Culture may over time lead to a shift in perception normalising agression, or in other words, it could shift the Overton Window towards militarism. For example, if ships were named something like "Peacekeeper" or "Ambassador" rather than "Torturer" or "Thug", it would lead to a perception of peace-keeping as their intended role. It works in the case of the Culture because of their extraordinary degree of self-awareness and anti-militarism; no member of the Culture could possibly lack cognizance of the significance of the names, wheras we, alas, live in somewhat less enlightened times. In the Culture it serves to emphasise the ugliness of their purpose, wheras if applied in our world could be all to easily misinterpreted as unvarnished militarism. It is interesting to note the degree of anti-militarism in Japan. Though this may be taken to an extreme in the opposition to taking part in international peacekeeping missions, at the very least it means that Japan is very unlikely to be subject to escalating influence and dominance by the military as may be permitted in other countries due to general public apathy. However, I think this also means that any attempt to emphasise the inherent ugliness the the purpose of the military would be prima facie faced with extreme opposition, no matter the intent.
Animats 11y ago
"Gate", the anime,[1] was written by a former JSDF member and is being used for recruiting by the JSDF.[2] It has its cute moments, but in some ways it's painfully serious. The concept is that a Roman-empire level culture with huge armies tries to invade Tokyo and conquer Japan via a magical inter-world gate in Ginza. Here's the short version.[3] [1] http://gate-anime.com/ http://gate-anime.com/ [2] http://www.mod.go.jp/pco/tokyo/tokusetu/tokusetu.html http://www.mod.go.jp/pco/tokyo/tokusetu/tokusetu.html [3] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mWi2mYklRl4 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mWi2mYklRl4
- ttflee 11y ago
  Not only Roman empire level culture but also elves，wizards and dragons.
- caskance 11y ago
  It's also full of Japanese imperialist apologism. As you might expect from such a source.
- viewer5 11y ago
  I watched that, and enjoyed it for the most part, but I either totally missed, or they just didn't explain, what the purpose was for the initial invasion from the other world into Japan. Do we know what that was all about? Was it purely, "Hey we've got this sweet portal thing, let's go seize whatever's on the other side"?
  - mjevans 11y ago
    What I got from watching it (during one of the political discussions in a later episode) was that the initial effort, what is seen in the opening scenes, was a combination of blind land grab and attempting to experiment with a new resource. Naturally, once the invading force had awoken the wrath of the public the SDF fought.
  - Animats 11y ago
    That's made clear in the manga, in a scene that was dropped from the anime.[1] [1] http://www.mangahere.co/manga/gate_jietai_kare_no_chi_nite_kaku_tatakeri/c001/3.html http://www.mangahere.co/manga/gate_jietai_kare_no_chi_nite_k...
patio11 11y ago
Related (won't teach you anything very profound but you'll chuckle): An actual commercial for the Japan Maritime Self-Defense force. An actual commercial for the US Navy. Then the same two commercials with the audio switched. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nNdPPEwguDQ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nNdPPEwguDQ (This highly selectively picked example aside, the main recruitment messages for the JSDF are very similar to that of the armed services in the US: "Preserve the peace. Serve the nation. Learn a useful trade. Enquire within.")
api 11y ago
"Or does the Japanese constitution allow for preëmptive strikes outside of domestic borders, in the manner of a traditional military?" I found this sentence interesting -- I've been under the impression for some time that preemptive war is not necessarily a traditional doctrine, at least in America, and was introduced in the post-9/11 national security backlash era. But I don't know enough about military history to really know.
- DDickson 11y ago
  I also thought that line was interesting, because, the way I look at it, Pearl Harbor was a pre-preemptive strike by the Empire of Japan. They figured our entry into WWII was imminent and decided to strike early and decisively to cripple our strength in the Pacific.
  - JohnBooty 11y ago
    I just posted this, but you posted sooner and were more concise.
- zeveb 11y ago
  > I found this sentence interesting -- I've been under the impression for some time that preemptive war is not necessarily a traditional doctrine, at least in America I'm not certain what exactly 'preemptive war' is supposed to be, either than war undertaken in order to preempt a worse possibility (which would seem to be the traditional doctrine for going to war in general). America's first war, the Quasi-War with France, could be seen as a kind of pre-emptive war in order to prevent further seizures of our ships, which was seen as worse than the war itself. The First Barbary War was waged in order to prevent the Barbary Pirates (of Tunis, Tripoli & Algiers) from seizing & enslaving our merchant sailors. It should stand to reason that war was considered preferable to continued enslavement of American citizens. The War of 1812, of course, was waged in response to certain British provocations whose continuation was considered worse than war. The Second Barbary War was again waged in order to prevent the Barbary Pirates from seizing & enslaving our sailors.
- JohnBooty 11y ago
comex 11y ago
Not that putting the military in cute cartoons is always associated with pacifism. Here's North Korea for you: http://www.cracked.com/article_19329_the-5-craziest-childrens-cartoons-from-north-korea.html http://www.cracked.com/article_19329_the-5-craziest-children... edit: or, for that matter, WWII era Japan itself: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Momotarō:_Umi_no_Shinpei https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Momotarō:_Umi_no_Shinpei
hasenj 11y ago
Somewhat related: using a cute teenage idol in a recruitment ad: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8xoEiPbZ4yo https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8xoEiPbZ4yo
dropit_sphere 11y ago
Japan is not an independent country, but rather a satellite of the United States. from the article: "...ongoing debate over the mission of the Japan Self-Defense Forces. Is their role truly one of self-defense, pure and simple? Or does the Japanese constitution allow for preëmptive strikes outside of domestic borders, in the manner of a traditional military?" This is kind of shocking to read when you think about it: 1) militaries, historically, are for more than self-defense, even pre-emptive self-defense. The article leaves this out, casting the choice as "in-border defense vs out-border defense." 2) In a rare moment of visible doublethink, the article also implies plainly that it is in doubt whether Japan has a military at all: Traditional militaries are the only kind, folks. How does Japan survive as a sovereign nation without a military? Answer: it doesn't. Strange times.
- rrego 11y ago
  Why does a country need to have a military (as opposed to whatever the SDF is) to remain sovereign/independent? I don't see it as doublethink; rather, the author doesn't carry that assumption. Does Japan not govern itself?
- krapp 11y ago
  It might be the case that Japan's pacifist stance was forced on them by the US ~70 years ago, but they're still officially pacifist because they choose to be. The US has wanted Japan to take a more aggressive military role for years, particularly in dealing with the other Asian countries, but why should they, when they have the world's most powerful and violent superpower sworn to throw themselves into the meat grinder on Japan's behalf?
- pjc50 11y ago
  Japan is not allowed to have a preemptive overseas strike capability because of what they did with it last time. (Also, there are a number of microstates with ceremonial armed forces only, and Costa Rica has none at all)

69 points by coloneltcb 11y ago

Seeing how anime culture has permeated the military in Japan makes me wonder if anime/manga/games like Strike Witches[0], Kancolle[1], and Girls und Panzer[2] are strictly for entertainment purposes or if they are in part developed as a recruitment tool? [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strike_Witches https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strike_Witches [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kantai_Collection https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kantai_Collection [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Girls_und_Panzer https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Girls_und_Panzer Edit: As I read more of the article I see it mentions "Combined Fleet Girls Collection" which is the Kancolle I referenced.

an_ko 11y ago
> recruitment tool Are Counter Strike, Battlefield and their ilk in the west "recruitment tools"? Nah. Fiction involving military is still just fiction and implies little about its purpose. All those examples are definitely entertaining though.
- fluxquanta 11y ago
  While Counter Strike and Battlefield in particular aren't used as recruitment tools, the US military has (albeit overtly) gotten involved in video games in the past[0], so it's not outside the realm of possibility. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/America%27s_Army https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/America%27s_Army

njharman 11y ago

I would bet a large part (or all of it) is that anime and cartoons and toys aren't seen as toys, as things just for children, it is normal adult interest. Much anime is very adult and dark. Other anime is war filled. It's no different than painting pin-up girls on on your B-17. Also, btw, US Cartoons bugs, daffy, woodpecker are not uncommon nose art subjects. google "bugs bunny nose art".

jordigh 11y ago
> it is normal adult interest. Is it really? How intimate are you with Japanese culture? I am skeptical that Japanese people generally view anime with the same reverence that they view the works of Akira Kurosawa or Natsume Soseki. edit: okay, anime is serious business.
- sp332 11y ago
  You don't have to be Kurosawa to be a "normal adult interest".
- deleted 11y ago
  [deleted]
- fluxquanta 11y ago
  It is its own medium of entertainment and the content can vary wildly between different intellectual properties depending on the target audience. Pigeon-holing anime as being "for kids only" is like watching a Pixar production and saying that all American movies are "for kids only". The difference between intended audiences is more easily observed when you look at manga (comic books, often adapted to anime if successful) rather than just the animated cartoons, since the language used in manga directly reflects the target demographic. Plenty of manga are directed at an older audience and will use harder, more complicated kanji (Chinese characters), with or without furigana (helper text in a simpler alphabet) than those directed toward children.
- ics 11y ago
  My partner's parents and grandparents watch anime, read manga, and her parents definitely game way more than us (PC, iPhone, and handheld PS/Nintendo/...). It's a casual activity like reading a book or watching TV, not just for techies/geeks/nerds/etc. But to address any concerns about value to society, they do hold Katsuhiro Otomo's Akira on a pretty high pedestal. Not the same as Kurosawa, but why should that matter? Edited to add: both her and my parents are roughly the same age and share many interests in art/media/culture. Mine are from the US and were adults by the time Pong came out; despite the explosion of media in recent years I don't think the type of content they look for is much different than it would be otherwise. South Park might be the only exception.

NoGravitas 11y ago

> This stressful, ongoing debate fuels the seeming paradox of an “endearing” military force. In Japan, where indirect communication is highly valued, cute illustrations have long played the role of tension-breakers and mediators in situations of conflict. Thus kawaii mascots, whether miniskirted girls or bunny-rabbit decoy launchers, are both a reflection of pop-cultural trends and a way to defuse the very touchy issues surrounding the military’s undeniable presence. Contrast this to the way [The Culture][0] dealt with their ambivalence over having to tool up to fight a full-scale war (the Idiran War). They specifically designed their warships to be ugly, and gave them ship class names reflecting the ugliness of their roles (e.g. Gangster, Torturer, Psychopath, and Thug). While depicting your weapons as kawaii is very different from depicting them as heroic/inspiring, I think the Culture's lack of euphemism is the better way to go. [0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Culture https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Culture

nova 11y ago
On the other hand, The Culture is just sci-fi, while Japan exists.
dkbrk 11y ago
This is a very good point, but I think the Japanese way might actually be better. The problem is that emphasising brutality and ugliness in the style of the Culture may over time lead to a shift in perception normalising agression, or in other words, it could shift the Overton Window towards militarism. For example, if ships were named something like "Peacekeeper" or "Ambassador" rather than "Torturer" or "Thug", it would lead to a perception of peace-keeping as their intended role. It works in the case of the Culture because of their extraordinary degree of self-awareness and anti-militarism; no member of the Culture could possibly lack cognizance of the significance of the names, wheras we, alas, live in somewhat less enlightened times. In the Culture it serves to emphasise the ugliness of their purpose, wheras if applied in our world could be all to easily misinterpreted as unvarnished militarism. It is interesting to note the degree of anti-militarism in Japan. Though this may be taken to an extreme in the opposition to taking part in international peacekeeping missions, at the very least it means that Japan is very unlikely to be subject to escalating influence and dominance by the military as may be permitted in other countries due to general public apathy. However, I think this also means that any attempt to emphasise the inherent ugliness the the purpose of the military would be prima facie faced with extreme opposition, no matter the intent.

Animats 11y ago

"Gate", the anime,[1] was written by a former JSDF member and is being used for recruiting by the JSDF.[2] It has its cute moments, but in some ways it's painfully serious. The concept is that a Roman-empire level culture with huge armies tries to invade Tokyo and conquer Japan via a magical inter-world gate in Ginza. Here's the short version.[3] [1] http://gate-anime.com/ http://gate-anime.com/ [2] http://www.mod.go.jp/pco/tokyo/tokusetu/tokusetu.html http://www.mod.go.jp/pco/tokyo/tokusetu/tokusetu.html [3] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mWi2mYklRl4 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mWi2mYklRl4

ttflee 11y ago
Not only Roman empire level culture but also elves，wizards and dragons.
caskance 11y ago
It's also full of Japanese imperialist apologism. As you might expect from such a source.
viewer5 11y ago
I watched that, and enjoyed it for the most part, but I either totally missed, or they just didn't explain, what the purpose was for the initial invasion from the other world into Japan. Do we know what that was all about? Was it purely, "Hey we've got this sweet portal thing, let's go seize whatever's on the other side"?
- mjevans 11y ago
  What I got from watching it (during one of the political discussions in a later episode) was that the initial effort, what is seen in the opening scenes, was a combination of blind land grab and attempting to experiment with a new resource. Naturally, once the invading force had awoken the wrath of the public the SDF fought.
- Animats 11y ago
  That's made clear in the manga, in a scene that was dropped from the anime.[1] [1] http://www.mangahere.co/manga/gate_jietai_kare_no_chi_nite_kaku_tatakeri/c001/3.html http://www.mangahere.co/manga/gate_jietai_kare_no_chi_nite_k...

patio11 11y ago

Related (won't teach you anything very profound but you'll chuckle): An actual commercial for the Japan Maritime Self-Defense force. An actual commercial for the US Navy. Then the same two commercials with the audio switched. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nNdPPEwguDQ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nNdPPEwguDQ (This highly selectively picked example aside, the main recruitment messages for the JSDF are very similar to that of the armed services in the US: "Preserve the peace. Serve the nation. Learn a useful trade. Enquire within.")

api 11y ago

"Or does the Japanese constitution allow for preëmptive strikes outside of domestic borders, in the manner of a traditional military?" I found this sentence interesting -- I've been under the impression for some time that preemptive war is not necessarily a traditional doctrine, at least in America, and was introduced in the post-9/11 national security backlash era. But I don't know enough about military history to really know.

DDickson 11y ago
I also thought that line was interesting, because, the way I look at it, Pearl Harbor was a pre-preemptive strike by the Empire of Japan. They figured our entry into WWII was imminent and decided to strike early and decisively to cripple our strength in the Pacific.
- JohnBooty 11y ago
  I just posted this, but you posted sooner and were more concise.
zeveb 11y ago
> I found this sentence interesting -- I've been under the impression for some time that preemptive war is not necessarily a traditional doctrine, at least in America I'm not certain what exactly 'preemptive war' is supposed to be, either than war undertaken in order to preempt a worse possibility (which would seem to be the traditional doctrine for going to war in general). America's first war, the Quasi-War with France, could be seen as a kind of pre-emptive war in order to prevent further seizures of our ships, which was seen as worse than the war itself. The First Barbary War was waged in order to prevent the Barbary Pirates (of Tunis, Tripoli & Algiers) from seizing & enslaving our merchant sailors. It should stand to reason that war was considered preferable to continued enslavement of American citizens. The War of 1812, of course, was waged in response to certain British provocations whose continuation was considered worse than war. The Second Barbary War was again waged in order to prevent the Barbary Pirates from seizing & enslaving our sailors.
JohnBooty 11y ago

comex 11y ago

Not that putting the military in cute cartoons is always associated with pacifism. Here's North Korea for you: http://www.cracked.com/article_19329_the-5-craziest-childrens-cartoons-from-north-korea.html http://www.cracked.com/article_19329_the-5-craziest-children... edit: or, for that matter, WWII era Japan itself: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Momotarō:_Umi_no_Shinpei https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Momotarō:_Umi_no_Shinpei

hasenj 11y ago

Somewhat related: using a cute teenage idol in a recruitment ad: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8xoEiPbZ4yo https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8xoEiPbZ4yo

dropit_sphere 11y ago

Japan is not an independent country, but rather a satellite of the United States. from the article: "...ongoing debate over the mission of the Japan Self-Defense Forces. Is their role truly one of self-defense, pure and simple? Or does the Japanese constitution allow for preëmptive strikes outside of domestic borders, in the manner of a traditional military?" This is kind of shocking to read when you think about it: 1) militaries, historically, are for more than self-defense, even pre-emptive self-defense. The article leaves this out, casting the choice as "in-border defense vs out-border defense." 2) In a rare moment of visible doublethink, the article also implies plainly that it is in doubt whether Japan has a military at all: Traditional militaries are the only kind, folks. How does Japan survive as a sovereign nation without a military? Answer: it doesn't. Strange times.

rrego 11y ago
Why does a country need to have a military (as opposed to whatever the SDF is) to remain sovereign/independent? I don't see it as doublethink; rather, the author doesn't carry that assumption. Does Japan not govern itself?
krapp 11y ago
It might be the case that Japan's pacifist stance was forced on them by the US ~70 years ago, but they're still officially pacifist because they choose to be. The US has wanted Japan to take a more aggressive military role for years, particularly in dealing with the other Asian countries, but why should they, when they have the world's most powerful and violent superpower sworn to throw themselves into the meat grinder on Japan's behalf?
pjc50 11y ago
Japan is not allowed to have a preemptive overseas strike capability because of what they did with it last time. (Also, there are a number of microstates with ceremonial armed forces only, and Costa Rica has none at all)