Download - Canada ALPHA

Japan’s “masochistic education” in history. Fujioka and the two groups enjoyed large support from a variety
of individuals including 62 lawmakers from the LDP, academics and novelists. Among other things, Fujioka
questioned the death tolls of the Nanking Atrocities in the textbooks. He indicated the fi gures of hundreds of
thousands were “groundless” and criticized especially those textbooks that quoted the number of “200,000”
or “over 100,000” without attribution.
Claiming to have been persuaded by “thorough and innovative” research on the topic by Higashinakano
Shudo, a professor of intellectual history at Asia University, Fujioka later concluded that there was no massacre
in 1937 Nanking.
Throughout 1999, Fujioka and Higashinakano continued to contribute articles and essays to magazines
and newspapers that sternly condemned other historians and reckoned the Nanjing Massacre as a latter-day
fabrication.
Meanwhile, the two organizations founded by Fujioka also cooperated in disseminating Fujioka and
Higashinakano’s view on the Nanking Atrocities. For instance, on July 31, 1999, the Association hosted a
symposium in Tokyo that called the Nanjing Massacre “the biggest lie of the 20th century.”
On January 23, 2000, a citizens’ group called “The Group to Rectify One-sided Wartime Exhibitions”
organized a conference also dubbing the Rape of Nanking “the biggest lie of the 20th century” in the semipublic
Osaka International Peace Center (commonly known as Peace Osaka in Japan).
Unlike the previous symposium or any other comparable forums, this particular conference, which invited
Higashinakano as one of the key panelists, engaged keen attention from the media worldwide, especially in
China.
About a week before the event took place, Chinese newspapers such as Renmin Ribao and China Youth
Daily began reporting on the provocative title and the meeting’s intention to play down the Atrocities.
Beijing offi cially urged Tokyo to take action to stop the forum. While assuring China of the Japanese
government’s stance that the Nanjing Massacre was an undeniable fact, the Foreign Ministry said that it had
no right to intervene in an event organized by citizens.
In Nanking, one day after the conference was held, about 500 people gathered to protest at the Memorial
Hall for Compatriot Victims of the Japanese Military’s Nanjing Massacre. “The conference broke Chinese
people’s hearts,” says Zhu Chengshan, the director of the Memorial Hall. It was the worst in the recent
controversy. They conspicuously denied the historical fact and even labeled it ‘the biggest lie’ in the 20th
century. Does freedom of speech mean that you can say anything to hurt people? “Does freedom of speech
mean that you can say anything to hurt people?” asks Zhu Chengshan. (Interview by author on March 24,
2000.)
In China the mass media harshly criticized the event in their newspaper articles, editorials, and TV
programs. Many local newspapers reprinted the editorial piece in Renmin Ribao titled “Who’s fabricating the
‘lie’?” written by Zhu. n the headline for its editorial piece China Youth Daily even used the term, “riben guiji,”
a derogatory expression meaning Japanese devils. Shanghai TV made a lengthy news document titled “Wrath
of Nanjing.”
In Japan there was a difference of opinion about the event. Some argued that as long as it is not illegal,
anyone should be allowed to speak one’s opinion freely. They said because Peace Osaka was a semi-public
institution, the door must be open for everyone. Thus no one had the right to stop the event. Others argued
that since the Peace Osaka was established “not to forget the tremendous damage infl icted by Japan on people
in China and other Asia-Pacifi c countries as well as people in Korea and Taiwan under colonial rule,” the
administrators of the facility should have stopped any event that contradicted the principle. They said it was
too harmful to be protected under freedom of speech and pointed out that if it had been in Germany, the
conference would have been a punishable crime.
About two and a half months later in Peace Osaka, those Japanese who were against the theme of the
previous conference organized another meeting called “What the Nanjing Massacre calls for from Japan.”
253