http://fx.sakura.ne.jp/~sympow/

I have never seen cartoons more violent than cartoons of this type. I have seen more violent cartoons drawings on the internet, but they were of the same type - 'hentai'. I would not advise clicking the link if you are repulsed by extreme violence.

Its hard but nothing to get so frighted about

Japan is just plain messed up.

Seriously, they've got this insane conformist hyper-industrious society, and then all this crazy **** on the side.

One produces the other.

Seriously, they've got this insane conformist hyper-industrious society
I do not see what is insane about Japanese collectivism and their 'hyper-industrious' society. We need both of these qualities in the West, especially the former quality.
This quality you call 'conformist'. But this is a pejorative term. If you are going to discuss this with me, always use objective terms, terms which do not import any amount of emotionalism or bias whatsoever. Thank you.
But let us not turn this into a debate on Japan in general: many people in the West, too, have 'death fetishes': the Japanese simply express their fetishes in the form of hand-drawings sometimes. This was common in the West as well, before photography.
Its hard but nothing to get so frighted about
What is hard? Who is frightened? Do you realise that you ended a clause with a preposition?
I am not frightened; I find this type of pornography mildly arousing.

I wondered what happened to that site after my original link went down.

http://fx.sakura.ne.jp/~sympow/doku/english/uziga00.html

I think it's funny.

Japan's conformist society causes problems. A society where people have a work ethic is great, but when there's so much pressure to fit exactly into a mold, problems are created.

Japanese is light-years ahead of the rest of the world in terms of frightening pornography, whether drawn or photographed. There are extremely strong currents of misogyny, far more than is available in most Western pornography.

~~Japan's conformist society causes problems. A society where people have a work ethic is great, but when there's so much pressure to fit exactly into a mold, problems are created.
__
What problems? Do these 'problems' outweigh the benefits?
__
~~Japanese is light-years ahead of the rest of the world in terms of frightening pornography, whether drawn or photographed.
__
Only a small minority of people in Japan have these fetishes.
__
~~There are extremely strong currents of misogyny, far more than is available in most Western pornography.
Something whereof we in the West need more.

Japan's conformist society causes problems. A society where people have a work ethic is great, but when there's so much pressure to fit exactly into a mold, problems are created.
Any society will have these "problems".

Japanese is light-years ahead of the rest of the world in terms of frightening pornography, whether drawn or photographed.
Other than sheer volume per capita, how so? The same sorts of "perversion" can be found anywhere featherless bipeds exist. Of course, the means of expressing these tendencies do vary.
There are extremely strong currents of misogyny, far more than is available in most Western pornography.
What the hell? In Japanese pornography there is a great deal of female domination of men as well. Much of this involves torture and scatological humiliation of the males. There is also female exploitation of men in that yaoi and other "perverse" depictions of boys are popular among Japanese women. Why then haven't you mentioned a "strong current of misandry"? Talk about tunnel vision.

Perhaps misogyny is what drives you to assume that women can only be passive, powerless victims.

Only a small minority of people in Japan have these fetishes.

I disagree. For the most part, "these" are not fetishes. A fetish is an object required for sexual satisfaction. Sadomasochism (giving/receiving pain and/or humiliation for sexual reasons) is not a fetish. It is unlikely that only a small minority have sadistic and/or masochistic tendencies. These instead seem to be traits prevalent among featherless bipeds.

~~In Japanese pornography there is a great deal of female domination of men as well.
__
There is some, but usually the male dominates the female and the female is ultra-feminine and ultra-submissive, such that you would never see anywhere else. Females in Japanese pornography are often instructed to cry and act humiliated.

There is some, but usually the male dominates the female and the female is ultra-feminine and ultra-submissive
I do not think so. There is probably just as much all-female porn wherein females dominate each other.
Females in Japanese pornography are often instructed to cry and act humiliated.
Females that are truly being degraded and abused need not be instructed to cry or act humiliated. I think some females really are humiliated, degraded, and abused in Japanese porn but the same is true for some of the males.

Ix, I sometimes have to wonder if you are really an admirer of oriental despotism, collectivism, and conformity; and that Marxian Socialism is just a mask or facade you put on over these things.

Ix, I sometimes have to wonder if you are really an admirer of oriental despotism, collectivism, and conformity; and that Marxian Socialism is just a mask or facade you put on over these things.
This is largely true not just for Ix (or at least his latest persona) but also for most "Communist" regimes in the Orient. Mao Tse-tung was closer to a traditional Chinese emperor than any sort of Marxist revolutionary. The Juche concept is more a form of national socialism for Koreans than any faithful expression of Marxist ideology.

~~I disagree. For the most part, "these" are not fetishes. A fetish is an object required for sexual satisfaction. Sadomasochism (giving/receiving pain and/or humiliation for sexual reasons) is not a fetish. It is unlikely that only a small minority have sadistic and/or masochistic tendencies. These instead seem to be traits prevalent among featherless bipeds.
__
The object is the person who is cut up, missing a limp, damaged in some way. This is commonly called 'death fetish.' This may not be sadomasochistic. The person with a death fetish may be aroused blood, severed limbs, cuts, etc., but may not be aroused by doing sadistic things or seeing them done.

The object is the person who is cut up, missing a limp, damaged in some way. This is commonly called 'death fetish.' This may not be sadomasochistic. The person with a death fetish may be aroused blood, severed limbs, cuts, etc., but may not be aroused by doing sadistic things or seeing them done.
Or such a person may be aroused by a combination of these factors. Also, arousal by blood, severed limbs, etc. does not qualify as a 'fetish' unless it is the only way one can be sexually satisfied.

~~Ix, I sometimes have to wonder if you are really an admirer of oriental despotism, collectivism, and conformity;
__
I have always liked oriental collectivism and conformity, but never despotism. I detest despotism in all its forms.
__
~~and that Marxian Socialism is just a mask or facade you put on over these things.
__
You are saying I am pretending to be a Marxist because I like 'oriental despotism, collectivism, and conformity'? This does not make any sense at all to me. Looks like an 'illicit process' to me.

You are saying I am pretending to be a Marxist because I like 'oriental despotism, collectivism, and conformity'?
If so, you would hardly be the only one of your kind. To the contrary, most of your putative allies in the Orient have little to do with anything Marx actually advocated.

~~This is largely true not just for Ix (or at least his latest persona)
__
Latest persona? I have not changed ideologically for a very long time. Actually, I have went through one ideological change within the past five years.
__
~~Mao Tse-tung was closer to a traditional Chinese emperor than any sort of Marxist revolutionary.
__
He was the farthest thing there is from an emperor.
__
~~The Juche concept is more a form of national socialism for Koreans than any faithful expression of Marxist ideology.
__
Not true at all. That is an anti-Jucheist misrepresentation of the Juche Idea. North Korea, along with China and Albania, was the leading anti-revisionist socialist country (and now is the only anti-revisionist socialist country). I would suggest reading: http://www.korea-dpr.com/users/jisge/articles.htm (The Worker's Party of Korea's Struggle against Revisionism)

Jucheism has its origins in Marxism-Leninism, but is a revolutionary and original philosophical world outlook. It does not stand opposed to Marxism-Leninism, but complements it, and advances the idea of preserving the national character of the country which adapts it (instead of copying the 'Soviet model' or whatever).

The Juche Idea raises the philosophical principle that man is the master of everything - with Chajusong, creativity and consciousness - and that he decided everything, and transforms nature and soceity to serve him, and on this basis value judgements are to be made. It views the motive force in history to be the popular masses in the struggle for Chajusong. At the worst, then, it is more Hegelian than orthodox Marxism.

And there is no such thing as a 'faithul expression of Marxist ideology'. Marxism is a science, something which adapts to new conditions, something which changes, not something to be dogmatically asserted and viewed as immutable and universal.
__
~~Or such a person may be aroused by a combination of these factors. Also, arousal by blood, severed limbs, etc. does not qualify as a 'fetish' unless it is the only way one can be sexually satisfied.
__
Not true. Many sexual tendencies which are officially classified as 'fetishes' are not the only ways in which the person with those tendencies can be aroused. For example people with foot fetishes usually enjoy normal sexual intercourse.
__
~~To the contrary, most of your putative allies in the Orient have little to do with anything Marx actually advocated.
__
This is amusing coming from someone who has no doubt read nothing of Karl Marx, Engels, Lenin and Stalin (whose works we Marxists call 'the classics').
In what way do they contradict what Marx 'actually advoacted'? And do you honestly believe that we Marxists think Marx's opinions are absolute? No, we do not. That would be idolatry, something to which I and all other consistent Marxists are opposed.

This is amusing coming from someone who has no doubt read nothing of Karl Marx, Engels, Lenin and Stalin (whose works we Marxists call 'the classics').
In what way do they contradict what Marx 'actually advoacted'? And do you honestly believe that we Marxists think Marx's opinions are absolute? No, we do not. That would be idolatry, something to which I and all other consistent Marxists are opposed.

First of all, Marx advocated industrial workers' revolution, not the peasant revolution which Mao actualized. Communism in China has reverted to their 5000 year old tradition of needing central authoritarianism to control such a massive country. They've been "Communist" for only 50 years and they are already more capitalist than Western European countries which are heavily socialized. China even is considering implementing eugenics programs to weed out the sickly and stupid. So much for egalitarianism. :D

I have always liked oriental collectivism and conformity, but never despotism. I detest despotism in all its forms.


All government is despotism. It is inevitable. Calhoun was one of the people who saw this, I believe. Since all government is inherently despotic, it becomes a question of the best group being despotic over the less desirables.

"Democracy" ranges from ochlocracy to oligarchy, depending on how successful the media and vested corporate interests are at controlling the masses of cattle.

"Communism" inevitably results in despotism, but that despotism can take any one of a number of forms depending on the personality and inclinations of the man at the top.

Anarchy/libertarianism will result in despotism, too, because such states are not organized enough to defend themselves and will simply be conquered by the despotic states around them.

Limited republicanism takes longer to result in despotism than most other forms, but it still does inevitably. Corporate interests and political maneuvering eventually add up to the point that republicanism is drowned by more powerful forces. Witness the US from 1787 to 1860.

Exactly, Stribog. That's why I find appeal in the idea of a nice, clean dictatorship. At least it's honest.

~~First of all, Marx advocated industrial workers' revolution, not the peasant revolution which Mao actualized.
__
Yes, I agree. This is one significant differentiation.
__
~~Communism in China has reverted to their 5000 year old tradition of needing central authoritarianism to control such a massive country.
__
central organisation is key to socialist democracy.
__
~~They've been "Communist"
Not communist, but socialist (they do not even claim to be communist).
__
~~for only 50 years and they are already more capitalist than Western European countries which are heavily socialized.
__
Wrong. Market Socialism is not capitalism. It is part of a long range strategy. The idea is this: the Soviet Union is gone. China must fill the void as a strategic competitor with the United States. In order to do this it must surpass the U.S. economically, because China does not have the vast resources of the former Soviet Union. The only way for it to do this is with foreign capital: it would not grow fast enough on its own. The majority of the economy will stay in Chinese hands in a socialist manner. The PRC's economy grows at 8 or 9 percent each year, whereas the USA's grows at just 3% or less. By 2030 it will surpass the U.S., at which point they will return to 'full' socialism and expropriate the privately owned industry. (Still, private individuals are not allowed to employ others in China [as in Cuba].)
__
~~China even is considering implementing eugenics programs to weed out the sickly and stupid. So much for egalitarianism.
__
Socialism, Marxism, communism - these movements/ideologies are not, contrary to popular notion, about egalitarianism. We only advocate economic equality, not equality of abilities. Lenin attacked the idea of egalitarianism, and considered it a liberal misrepresenation of the beliefs of socialists
__
~~All government is despotism. It is inevitable. Calhoun was one of the people who saw this, I believe. Since all government is inherently despotic, it becomes a question of the best group being despotic over the less desirables.
__
And what I see here is not a single attempt to substantiate. I could just as easily say the opposite.
~~"Democracy" ranges from ochlocracy to oligarchy, depending on how successful the media and vested corporate interests are at controlling the masses of cattle.

~~"Communism" inevitably results in despotism, but that despotism can take any one of a number of forms depending on the personality and inclinations of the man at the top.
__
This is where you err. Democracy is a form of government, whereas communism, like capitalism, is a social system (i.e., not a form of government).

But I realise that by 'communism' you actually mean socialism (the social systems - not forms of government - of the USSR, China, etc.).

Socialism is a social system, and, like capitalism, may exist with or without many forms of government, such as democracy. Democracy is a form of government, and has existed in ancient slave societies, capitalist societies, and socialist societies.

A prerequisite of socialism is what is called the dictatorship of the working class. There is no historic example of socialism with 'one man on top'.

You have asserted that democracy, anarchism, libertarianism, communims, all lead to despotism, and though I might agree with you in some cases, you did not make any attempts to substantiate.

The Juche idea really has little to do with Marxism. I am very well acquainted with Marxism-Leninism, Ixabert. Juche is no more 'Marxist' than medieval Catholicism was 'Jewish'.

"Kim Jong Il...said that the basic indexes of a nation are homogeneity of bloodline, a common language and a common territory; in particular, that bloodline and language are the most important in defining a nation, and that a nation is a solid group of people who are united with homogeneity of bloodline, language and territory. He went on to say that Korean nation has long lived in one territory, inheriting the same bloodline and speaking the same language, and it is a nation with a history of 5,000 years and with a splendid culture, and that expatriates, too, belong to Korean nation.

"A nation is a cohesive group of people that was formed historically and the largest unit of social life. A nation is not formed or broken up easily by a change in the social system. The formation of a nation conditions the appearance of social classes and strata. Even in a classless society the nation still exists. If one's bloodline and language are same, one belongs to one and the same nation, even though one's ideology, ideals and territory are different. This is his outlook on the nation. Kim Jong Il emphasizes that, according to the Juche-oriented outlook on the nation, independence is the core of a nation's life and existence. As a man without independence can be likened to a dead man, so a nation which has lost its independence cannot exist or develop. This is common knowledge.

Therefore the question of a nation's destiny is directly linked with that of the nation's independence. The nation's independence is its essential nature and life and soul. The destiny of a nation is determined by whether the nation is independent or not and by how it realizes and defends its independence. In order to live and develop independently, every nation defends its national character, traditions and spirit and desires its unity. In this way, the spirit of national independence runs through the Juche-oriented outlook on the nation. This is Kim Jong Il's view. To promote the national independent spirit, one should posses national dignity and revolutionary pride. If one lacks national dignity and believes that one's nation is inferior to others, and if one lacks pride in the revolution, one cannot truly live independently and one is unable to defend national independence and dignity. This is also part of Kim Jong Il's faith . . ."

The above passage reads more like Fichte or Hitler than Marx. Yet it was written and published by the North Korean government (1997). Guiding Light General Kim Jong Il. Pyongyang: Foreign Languages Publishing House

The Juche Idea openly rejects orthodox Marxism-Leninism:

"Marxism-Leninism has limitations not only in the outlook on the world but also in the theory of socialism and communism. It is not easy to clarify what a communist society, an ideal society of humanity, is. Moreover, it was difficult to go beyond the limits of prediction and supposition in clarifying the aspects of communism in a capitalist society since no country had raised the building of socialism and communism as a practical problem. Living in a capitalist society, Marx analyzed its contradictions and on this basis proved the inevitability of the fall of capitalism and the transition to socialism and put forward the revolutionary theory on the overthrow of capitalism. Lenin analysed the crises and contradictions of imperialism, when capitalism reached the stage of monopoly. On this basis he elucidated the possibility of the victory of socialism in one country and put forward the revolutionary theory on the establishment of a socialist system. The founders of Marxism-Leninism, however, failed to expound a complete theory on socialism and communism owing to the limitations of their days."

On Some Problems of the Ideological Foundation of Socialism, Kim Jong Il, speech to the senior officials of the Central Committee of the Worker's Party of Korea, May 30 1990

"Kim Jong Il . . . said that the basic indexes of a nation are homogeneity of
bloodline, a common language and a common territory; in particular, that
bloodline and language are the most important in defining a nation, and that
a nation is a solid group of people who are united with homogeneity of
bloodline, language and territory. He went on to say that Korean nation has long lived in one territory, inheriting the same bloodline and speaking the same language, and it is a nation with a history of 5,000 years and with a splendid culture, and that expatriates, too, belong to Korean nation."

"A nation is a cohesive group of people that was formed historically and the largest unit of social life. A nation is not formed or broken up easily by a change in the social system. The formation of a nation conditions the appearance of social classes and strata. Even in a classless society the nation still exists. If one's bloodline and language are same, one belongs to one and the same nation, even though one's ideology, ideals and territory are different. This is his outlook on the nation. Kim Jong Il emphasizes that, according to the Juche-oriented outlook on the nation, independence is the core of a nation's life and existence. As a man without independence can be likened to a dead man, so a nation which has lost its independence cannot exist or develop. This is common knowledge."

"Therefore the question of a nation's destiny is directly linked with that of the nation's independence. The nation's independence is its essential nature and life and soul. The destiny of a nation is determined by whether the nation is independent or not and by how it realizes and defends
its independence. In order to live and develop independently, every nation
defends its national character, traditions and spirit and desires its unity.
In this way, the spirit of national independence runs through the Juche-oriented outlook on the nation."
What thesis of Marxism does this contradict? Name it, please. This is essential if your argument is to have any strength. Kim Il Sung's definition of nation, not essential to the Juche Idea by the way, only contradicts Stalin's definition of nation, not a prerequisite of being a Marxist. It is possible to be a Marxist and at the same time disagree with Stalin's definition of a nation, first formulated in his work, Marxism and the National Question. True, most Leninists today agree with Stalin's definition of nation, but again it is not a prerequisite of being a Marxist.

I agree 100% with Kim Il Sung's definition of nation.
"Marxism-Leninism has limitations not only in the outlook on the world but
also in the theory of socialism and communism. It is not easy to clarify
what a communist society, an ideal society of humanity, is. Moreover, it was
difficult to go beyond the limits of prediction and supposition in
clarifying the aspects of communism in a capitalist society since no country
had raised the building of socialism and communism as a practical problem.
Living in a capitalist society, Marx analyzed its contradictions and on this
basis proved the inevitability of the fall of capitalism and the transition
to socialism and put forward the revolutionary theory on the overthrow of
capitalism. Lenin analysed the crises and contradictions of imperialism,
when capitalism reached the stage of monopoly. On this basis he elucidated
the possibility of the victory of socialism in one country and put forward
the revolutionary theory on the establishment of a socialist system. The
founders of Marxism-Leninism, however, failed to expound a complete theory
on socialism and communism owing to the limitations of their days."
Every Marxist I know of fully acknowledges that 'orthodox Marxism' has limitations. But the only limitation Kim Jong Il here speaks of is the failure to complete the theory of socialism and communism, owing to historic limitations. The Juche Idea fills in the missing part of the theory to a degree, without rejecting what is already filled. It does not thereby contradict any thesis of Marxism. On the contary, it is complementary.

I agree with Kim Jong Il 100%.

Oh **** **** ****. I meant male domination of women. You know, women being jerked off on by hundreds of guys, not even good enough to be penetrated.

Why did I say "female domination of men"?

Oh **** **** ****. I meant male domination of women. You know, women being jerked off on by hundreds of guys, not even good enough to be penetrated.
How is that 'male domination of women'? What if the woman wants it? What if the woman enjoys it?
Why did I say "female domination of men"?
The point is that you seemed to ignore all the Japanese sado-porn with females dominating males, and females dominating females.

Japs raping and killing white women.
Wow. :|

I agree with Kim Jong Il 100%.

Yet you object to "despotism" and find "fascism" intolerable.

What thesis of Marxism does this contradict?
For one, Marxism advocates internationalism. It emphasizes class struggle, dismissing 'nations' as artificial structures propped up by capitalists in order to divide workers. To a Marxist, a worker from Korea should feel solidarity firstly with all other workers around the world. To a Juche national socialist, the same worker is first and foremost a Korean. Marxists claim that all nation-states will be obselete upon the advent of communism. Jucheists hold that the nation will still exist even when society is classless. Do I really have to explain this to you?

For one, Marxism is essentially internationalist in character. It emphasizes class struggle, dismissing 'nations' as artificial structures propped up by capitalists in order to divide workers. To a Marxist, a worker from Korea should feel solidarity foremost with all other workers around the world. To a Juche national socialist, the same worker is first and foremost a Korean. Marxists believe that all nation-states will be obselete upon the advent of communism. Juche national socialists believe that the nation is eternal. Do I really have to explain this to you?

"It is impossible to achieve national unity if the positive aspect of nationalism is ignored."
-Kim Jong il

"What is opposed to communism is not nationalism in general but bourgeois nationalism."
-Kim Jong-Il

National socialism incorporates bourgeous nationalism, that is to say, national chauvinism that subordinates the common interests of the nation to the interests of the bourgeoisie in the name of nationalism or patriotism. This is not proletarian nationalism, but proletarians are still able to indulge in reactionary nationalism. Proletarian nationalism, of course, is subordinate to proletarian internationalism. Proletarian nationalism demands the subordination of the interest of the proletarian struggle in any one country to the interest of the struggle on the whole world scale (otherwise it is not 'proletarian'); second, it demands the ability and willingness on the part of those nations which have achieved victory over the bourgeoisie, to undertake great national sacrifices for the destruction of international capital.

An example of proletarian nationalism would be DPRK nationalism.

What Marx, Lenin, and Stalin opposed was any sort of nationailsm which subordinated the interests of the international proletariat to the nation, not proletarian nationalism. With regard to the Soviet Union specifically, and not nationalism in general, of course they opposed Soviet nationalism because the Soviet Union consisted of several nations, and nationalism in that case would be divisive. The situation was different from, say, Korea or China, where nationalism was conducive to national unity, the national liberation struggle, and the thwarting of imperialist dominationism.

Furthermore, in their writings, by 'nationalism' they were generally referring to bourgeois nationalism, since no other nationalism had at that time existed. Every time they spoke ill of nationalism, they were only talking about the nationalism they knew, and the only nationalism they knew was bourgeois nationalism. Proletarian nationalism had yet to develop. They were also opposing what they felt was nationalism because the Soviet Union, nay, Russia before the revolution, consisted of several nations, and socialism was to be constructed in all of those nations. But what if socialism is being constructed in one nation? Nationalism is absolutely essential, and Lenin and Stalin did not and they could not oppose proletarian nationalism, because proletarian nationalism is internationalism. They supported proletarian nationalism but they viewed it as internationalist.

To a Marxist, a worker from Korea should feel solidarity foremost with all other workers around the world.
And to a Jucheist.
Marxists believe that all nation-states will be obselete upon the advent of communism.
Yes, but it must be remembered that they are using a different definition of 'nation', and are therefore speaking of something else.
Juche national socialists believe that the nation is eternal.
And they employ a different definition of nation.

Ixabert, in what sense are you Jucheist? You are not a member of the Korean nation. Do you call yourself Jucheist because you vicariously support Jucheism from your comfortable bedroom in America? Or do you actually support the DPRK with more than talk? Do you advocate some analogue to Jucheism for your own ethnicity/nation?

Ixabert, in what sense are you Jucheist? You are not a member of the Korean nation. Do you call yourself Jucheist because you vicariously support Jucheism from your comfortable bedroom in America? Or do you actually support the DPRK with more than talk? Do you advocate some analogue to Jucheism for your own ethnicity/nation?
Jucheism is applicable to all nations, and indeed the north Korean government has been relatively successful at exporting the ideology to other countries. I am a Jucheist in the sense that I believe in the philosophy of Juche. I am what may be called a Juche-oriented Maoist. And yes, I do advocate 'some analogue to Jucheism for my own ethnicity', to my own 'nation' (as Kim Il Sung defines it).

If I haven't seen such European cartoon I would also become tempted to blame the Japs.
Its capable to produce serial killers and psychopaths and such unnatural deviations of sexuality should be banned just like the child pornography.
There simply has to be some legal standards in the interest of public morality which would allow persecution of those who distribute such abominations.

The Japanese have the mangas because all other depictions of such sex and violence fantasies are illegal. Even standard porn in Japan is still extremely regulated. Although mangas do not appeal to me in any way - like most Japanese animation movies - one also has to note that the widespread comsumption of such mangas does not translate into rape and violent crime in real life. Japan still has one of the lowest crime rates in the world. Both rape and murder are virtually non-existent.

The Japanese have the mangas because all other depictions of such sex and violence fantasies are illegal. Even standard porn in Japan is still extremely regulated. Although mangas do not appeal to me in any way - like most Japanese animation movies - one also has to note that the widespread comsumption of such mangas does not translate into rape and violent crime in real life. Japan still has one of the lowest crime rates in the world. Both rape and murder are virtually non-existent.

Japanese society is so repressive and neurotic that it deals with the stress by containing it for long periods of time, then exploding in either waves of suicide (Japan has always been at or near the top in suicide rates) or in massive, incomprehensible campaigns of rape and sexual violence (witness Shanghai and Nanking).

Bring your daughter, bring your daughter to the slaughter! Let her go, let her go, let her go...

Japanese society is so repressive and neurotic that it deals with the stress by containing it for long periods of time, then exploding in either waves of suicide (Japan has always been at or near the top in suicide rates) or in massive, incomprehensible campaigns of rape and sexual violence (witness Shanghai and Nanking). Hey, that was almost 70 years ago - and most of what was reported was anti-Japanese propaganda. The truth was less spectacular.

But what does that tell about American society? Its murder, rape and suicide rates are much higher than the Japanese ones.