[yankeetravels]

Hey guys. Going through the search forum, I haven't seen this topic discussed so I wanted to see what experienced travelers such as yourselves thought of this topic.

I'm putting this topic out here because I had an interesting discussion with a close friend about this subject that I never really thought heavily about before. I will give you his situation. He is in the middle of a Europe trip and it's the first time he's really been out of North America. He has been to Portugal, France, and Italy on his trip so far.

I was telling him that I thought Italy and Germany were two of my most desired countries to see every inch of. He responded by telling me he doesn't really have a desire to visit Germany because he affiliates them with the history of World War II and the Nazis. He made the argument that by visiting that country, he felt like he was supporting a history that he disapproved of and was just contributing to the country's income and separated Japan from this by making the argument that they have done a lot more positive for the world post-WW2 and did not do as much damage in WW2 as Germany.

My response to this was that my belief is every superpower did not become a superpower without doing terrible things and that Germany is far from the only country to have an ugly war history. I used Cambodia as a big reference and that I had a desire to visit the country just to see the aftermath of a population genocide for myself. But I can think of plenty of countries that have an ugly war history such as China, Japan, England, THE UNITED STATES, Columbia, Russia, and even the two countries my friend is currently in: France and Italy.

I thought he had a pretty weak argument for not wanting to see Germany but I want to know if anyone else actively avoids a country because they don't like their political history. I'm not talking about countries that are currently not the safest places or even war zones such as Syria and Afghanistan, but places that are rather safe and even desirable to visit such as the United States, Italy, England, Germany, Japan, etc. just because they don't approve of a side they took in war or something along those lines with no other reason.

[262]

This thread will be more about politics than travel.

It doesn't belong here.

[Resolute]

I doubt ANYONE here follows this SJW logic. It doesn't make sense---it's idiocy in it's most potent form.

The USA engaged in Slavery. Should people boycott us?

How about Switzerland? During World War II, while they claimed neutrality and sat back and rode out the war, thousands of people deposited their money into it’s banks. Thousands of these account holders were killed in the carnage of the Nazi War machine. Yet when the relatives tried to claim the money, they were denied access to the funds, funds that the banks continued to make interest off. Not only did the Swiss screw over the Nazi victims but they were also the main bankers of the Nazis, funneling hundreds of millions of dollars into the German war effort.

You could make an argument that ANY country did something fucked up in the past and therefore should be "boycotted".

Aside from that, we're talking about actions of a GOVERNMENT, not it's people---that happened generations ago. Who cares?

Honestly your friend sounds like an SJW and those types of ideas really don't have a place here.

[Elster]

You should tell him that by showing such ignorance,intolerance and bigotry he is "literally Hitler"!

[Orson]

(01-30-2017 01:27 AM)yankeetravels Wrote:  

Hey guys. Going through the search forum, I haven't seen this topic discussed so I wanted to see what experienced travelers such as yourselves thought of this topic.

I'm putting this topic out here because I had an interesting discussion with a close friend about this subject that I never really thought heavily about before. I will give you his situation. He is in the middle of a Europe trip and it's the first time he's really been out of North America. He has been to Portugal, France, and Italy on his trip so far. _ _ _

He made the argument that by visiting that country (formerly Nazi Germany), he felt like he was supporting a history that he disapproved of and was just contributing to the country's income and separated Japan from this by making the argument that they have done a lot more positive for the world post-WW2 and did not do as much damage in WW2 as Germany. _ _ _

I thought he had a pretty weak argument for not wanting to see Germany but I want to know if anyone else actively avoids a country because they don't like their political history. I'm not talking about countries that are currently not the safest places or even war zones _ _ _

I believe there is a 'war guilt' argument - ie, the German Empire embraced invasion of other countries going back to World War One...resulting in the Second - implied here. Ergo, the nation - even if the perpetrators and participants are no longer alive - merely by associating one is on some way sanctioning their evils....

And, by contrast, he cites the "Good" done by Japan since the Second....

First of all, I have a problem imagining how one can measure this later "Good"? How? By what measure?

Secondly, there is a difference in war conduct that I'm sure your friend is not aware of.

Japan is still held in deep disregard and opprobrium by the nations that she invaded. For example, she hasn't "apologized" - Japan's history of conduct in the war, and even before an after, isn't' taught to its people.

The "comfort women" (Korean, Chinese, and many other occupied countries' women turned into sex slaves for soldiers) is still an evil scandal disputed and denied by Japan.

The "Rape of Nanking" in China by Japan resulted in roughly 300,000 dead civilians.

Closer to home, a British military veteran who lectured at my university in the 1990s said he helped liberate a Japanese labor camp holding British and allied prisoners in Burma (SE Asia). He said the Japanese recorded details of those they murdered; they were PROUD of the killing of the men and others.

He said that therefore he would have nothing to do with anything Japanese or Japanese made, out of respect for the dead. And thus he refused to take a ride to the library in my Mitsubishi auto (a company with made Japanese planes).

The Japanse also conducted horrific "medical" experiments on US prisoners of war while they were alive.

In fact, the two war theaters differed this way: Nazi Germany inflicted its "race" war on Jews, gays, Slavs and others within its postulated "Lebensraum," the "Bloodlands" that historian Timothy Snyder wrote about not many years ago.

The Japanese Imperial war was more of a war for racial supremacy where EVERY other nation's people was regarded as subhuman and beneath their respect for life!
The Germans were more selective and admired other nations (certainly France and Italy, and Greece, for example, if only for their earlier accomplishments ) - the Japs were indiscriminate!

One striking fact I recall is that rate of death by Allied officers held as prisoners - warriors owed the greatest respect by conquering nations - were very different.
The exact fact eludes my memory - but death at the hands of the Japs was like 10 times greater than by Germans.

The difference of horrors inflicted is such that while old veterans could meet and shake hands and socialize with Germans veterans by many nations. But with the Japs? Almost never has this happened. They were far, far more brutal and heinous in their conduct: if you were captured alive, you didn't deserve to live - the only honor they respected was dying.



So, my friend - how about trying on them's facts on your ignorant friend?

It may change his plans for travel.

HERE'S one well-sourced online account.

Over at Quora, the issue of which nation was more brutal in the conduct of the Second World War gets many opinions. But this one echoes mine:

Quote:

Paul Q. Le, Magic Man
Updated 4 Jul 2013
I say the Japanese. The Germans generally treated the Western Allies well according to international law except the Soviets. Japan treated every Western people and non-Japanese Asians, soldiers or not, like savages and animals. They verbally and physically abused POWs and used them as forced labor for the war effort. If POWs can't work, they get shot to death. The Japanese didn't even gave the POWs food and supplies and beat and shoot them just for the hell of it.

(Emphasis added)
https://www.quora.com/Which-country-was-.../Paul-Q-Le

But a chart shows that while 30% of Allies came back from Japanese capture, among the Chinese it was less than 1%. Thank about it...less than.... In the posts there, 100 Chinese gets mentioned; and only 50.....

Utterly, reprehensibly gruesome.

[whiteknightrises]

Your friend is soft

Not to mention

He has been to Portugal, France, and Italy on his trip so far.
- Portugal - colonized, raped, etc various countries
- France - same. Look at Algeria for an example
- Italy - Rome. See the sacking of Judea, etc

Japan - many Asian people probably hate Japan more than Jews hate Germany, etc.

[Rocha]

Your friend has a very limited view of world history.

Picking up small Portugal, and just from scratch, I leave a small compendium of the conflicts were we where protagonists:

- Portuguese Reconquista (868–1249)

- After the Reconquista – conflicts with Castile (1279-1415)

- Imperial expansion:

Portuguese–Mamluk war
Persian–Portuguese war
Portuguese intervention in Abyssinia
Portuguese conquest of Jaffna Kingdom
Dutch–Portuguese War
Battle of Alcácer Quibir
Ottoman–Portuguese conflicts
Conquest of Tunis (1535)
Ottoman–Portuguese conflicts (1538–57)
Ottoman–Portuguese conflicts (1558–66)
Ottoman–Portuguese conflicts (1580–89)
Ottoman–Venetian War (1714–18)
Guaraní War
Portuguese conquest of the Banda Oriental

- Independence Wars

War of the Portuguese Succession
Portuguese Restoration War
War of the Spanish Succession
Spanish–Portuguese War (1735–37)
Spanish–Portuguese War (1761–63)
Spanish–Portuguese War (1776–77)

- Napoleonic Wars:

Peninsular War (1807–14)

- Civil Wars (1820–51)

- Colonization of Africa (19th century)

- World War I (1916–18)

- Spanish Civil War (1936–39)

- Portuguese–Indian War (1961)

- Portuguese Colonial War (1961–74)

Many others are missing...