![]() | This category does not require a rating on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
As our article on Japanese fascism explains, "The use of the term fascism in relation to Japan is contentious and disputed." This is corroborated and expounded upon further by the Wikipedia articles on fascism, Japanese nationalism, Japanese militarism, Militarism-Socialism in Showa Japan, along with several others, and by a great many well-reputed formal scholarly works on the subject.
Thus, is it really appropriate to be labeling everyone involved in Japanese nationalism/militarism a "fascist"? Indeed, is it really appropriate to be labeling any Japanese at all fascists, outside of those who we explicitly know to have read and agreed with treatises on fascism by Italian political thinkers? LordAmeth 03:29, 29 September 2007 (UTC)
Can anyone explain how fascism, Japanese nationalism, Japanese militarism, Militarism-Socialism in Showa Japan corroborates and expounds on Japanese fascism being contentious or disputed?? I found no text stating such a thing about Japanese fascism in any those articles. Let me know what I'm missing here. Thanks. melonbarmonster 05:42, 30 September 2007 (UTC)
So shall we create a list of people who were fascists, so we can be sure which ones shouldn't be labelled that way? John Smith's 13:25, 30 September 2007 (UTC)
What many of you seem to supporting is borderline original research in my opinion. Correctly or incorrectly, what's important for wiki purposes is the existence of the term "Japanese facism". What does this term mean, how did it come to exist and how is it used? The term may be a misnomer is your opinion but as long it exists in the real world, it should be documented. melonbarmonster 04:45, 3 October 2007 (UTC)
I don't have a MA in Japanese history but from my conversations with friends who have MA or PhD in East Asian history is that academia is far from being a respite from Japanese POV and revisionist biases. The fact it's contentious or your personal observation is that most academics view this as being an incorrect term doesn't mean that it's invalid for wiki purposes. What matters is that it exists. Furthermore, the article states that it is controversial so I see absolutely no problem with the existence of this article or the use of the term.
And while I do think that documentation is helpful for application of correct categories, I'm not sure if the same referencing rules that apply to text of the article applies to the addition of categories. I would have to look into this more in WP:REF but from looking at other categories in other articles, categories aren't necessarily documented but applied more loosely. melonbarmonster 05:08, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
![]() | This category does not require a rating on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
As our article on Japanese fascism explains, "The use of the term fascism in relation to Japan is contentious and disputed." This is corroborated and expounded upon further by the Wikipedia articles on fascism, Japanese nationalism, Japanese militarism, Militarism-Socialism in Showa Japan, along with several others, and by a great many well-reputed formal scholarly works on the subject.
Thus, is it really appropriate to be labeling everyone involved in Japanese nationalism/militarism a "fascist"? Indeed, is it really appropriate to be labeling any Japanese at all fascists, outside of those who we explicitly know to have read and agreed with treatises on fascism by Italian political thinkers? LordAmeth 03:29, 29 September 2007 (UTC)
Can anyone explain how fascism, Japanese nationalism, Japanese militarism, Militarism-Socialism in Showa Japan corroborates and expounds on Japanese fascism being contentious or disputed?? I found no text stating such a thing about Japanese fascism in any those articles. Let me know what I'm missing here. Thanks. melonbarmonster 05:42, 30 September 2007 (UTC)
So shall we create a list of people who were fascists, so we can be sure which ones shouldn't be labelled that way? John Smith's 13:25, 30 September 2007 (UTC)
What many of you seem to supporting is borderline original research in my opinion. Correctly or incorrectly, what's important for wiki purposes is the existence of the term "Japanese facism". What does this term mean, how did it come to exist and how is it used? The term may be a misnomer is your opinion but as long it exists in the real world, it should be documented. melonbarmonster 04:45, 3 October 2007 (UTC)
I don't have a MA in Japanese history but from my conversations with friends who have MA or PhD in East Asian history is that academia is far from being a respite from Japanese POV and revisionist biases. The fact it's contentious or your personal observation is that most academics view this as being an incorrect term doesn't mean that it's invalid for wiki purposes. What matters is that it exists. Furthermore, the article states that it is controversial so I see absolutely no problem with the existence of this article or the use of the term.
And while I do think that documentation is helpful for application of correct categories, I'm not sure if the same referencing rules that apply to text of the article applies to the addition of categories. I would have to look into this more in WP:REF but from looking at other categories in other articles, categories aren't necessarily documented but applied more loosely. melonbarmonster 05:08, 4 October 2007 (UTC)