Cultural Perspectives

[Goughy]

I want to start by saying that Im making no comment on the rights or wrongs of these viewpoints. I mention them as they are alternative viewpoints on historical events that may or may not be accurate but at least provide food for thought.

So what are commonly held viewpoints on global events from a different cultural perspective? The ones I mention will have an Asian focus given that is an area I have been focusing on recently. What are others that people have heard and thought different and interesting?

- The Philippines is a very family based and clanish society. My Filipino language instructor commented how she couldnt understand how people could view Hitler as worse than Stalin. The logic? Stalin did it to his own people which is unforgivable whereas Hitler did it to a different group, which is obviously bad but not as bad as doing it 'to your own.'

- I was speaking to a member of a SE Asian government (FTR, not Philippines) and he explained to me that the nations in SE Asia owe the United States a huge debt of gratitude for the Vietnam war. Im not used to people talking good about the Vietnam War but he explained how the war allowed the fledgling democracies to grow which otherwise would have been crushed by their own Communist insurgents and how SE Asian democracy was dependant on the war.

- A Malaysian academic explained to me how during WWII the Japanese were seen as a liberating force to rescue Asia from 'White colonial power'. TBH, Id never heard much positive about Japan in WWII but apparently some hold them in high regard.

[GotSpin]

I want to start by saying that Im making no comment on the rights or wrongs of these viewpoints. I mention them as they are alternative viewpoints on historical events that may or may not be accurate but at least provide food for thought.

So what are commonly held viewpoints on global events from a different cultural perspective? The ones I mention will have an Asian focus given that is an area I have been focusing on recently. What are others that people have heard and thought different and interesting?

- The Philippines is a very family based and clanish society. My Filipino language instructor commented how she couldnt understand how people could view Hitler as worse than Stalin. The logic? Stalin did it to his own people which is unforgivable whereas Hitler did it to a different group, which is obviously bad but not as bad as doing it 'to your own.'

- I was speaking to a member of a SE Asian government (FTR, not Philippines) and he explained to me that the nations in SE Asia owe the United States a huge debt of gratitude for the Vietnam war. Im not used to people talking good about the Vietnam War but he explained how the war allowed the fledgling democracies to grow which otherwise would have been crushed by their own Communist insurgents and how SE Asian democracy was dependant on the war.

- A Malaysian academic explained to me how during WWII the Japanese were seen as a liberating force to rescue Asia from 'White colonial power'. TBH, Id never heard much positive about Japan in WWII but apparently some hold them in high regard.

I wonder how true this is. From what I've read, the Japanese certainly believed so. However, the Japanese also certainly felt they were more superior to other asian races and I'm quite sure they didn't treat them any better than the 'white colonial powers'. It's been a while since I studied that particular aspect of WWII but I think I tend to disagree with the above. Though I suppose a Malaysian academic would know more than me I tend to recall that the Japanese thought very lowly of many other asian nations.

[andyc]

The emphasis on family isn't unique to just the Philippines, it's an Asian-wide trend really.

[Son Of Coco]

The emphasis on family isn't unique to just the Philippines, it's an Asian-wide trend really.

Yeah. it's certainly the way it is here in Korea. And they hate the Japanese too, certainly don't hold them in high regard generally. Might have something to do with the Japanese invading Korea quite a while back though.

[jeevan]

Japan began it's imperial expansion (in the couple of decades preceding before WW II) by annexing Korea and then staged the Manchukuo farce to grab parts of China after Chiang Kai-Shek finally managed a semblance of a government in China. Neither Korea nor China were occupied by the white man at the time.

So liberating Asia from the white man has a nice ring to it, but isn't backed by facts.

[Sanz]

So liberating Asia from the white man has a nice ring to it, but isn't backed by facts.

Well it is as far as Indian National Army is considered. It is a fact that INA fought alongside the Japanese Army against the British with an aim to liberate India from the British Empire.

[G.I.Joe]

Well it is as far as Indian National Army is considered. It is a fact that INA fought alongside the Japanese Army against the British with an aim to liberate India from the British Empire.

The INA were a bunch of opportunists. They went alongwith the Japanese because their interests happened to be aligned together. They had a pact with Hitler in their sights too.

[Sanz]

The INA were a bunch of opportunists.

History doesn't think of them as such. I think they were revolutionaries whose main goal was to free India from the British.

[GotSpin]

History doesn't think of them as such. I think they were revolutionaries whose main goal was to free India from the British.

What? Fairly sure history can be interpreted in a number of different ways.

[Sanz]

Ofcourse it can be and I was talking about the History in the context of Indian Freedom Struggle. While there were individuals in India during that period who thought INA was a traitor organization the general public sentiment for the INA and its main leader was very positive and supportive.

[G.I.Joe]

History doesn't think of them as such. I think they were revolutionaries whose main goal was to free India from the British.

History is what we choose to make of it. Their goals might have been in the interest of Indians, but the alignments they sought to achieve those goals were less than desirable, to make an understatement. The sentiments of the general public towards them were positive and supportive because they chose to overlook those aspects.

[Sir Alex]

History is what GI Joe wants it to be.

[G.I.Joe]

One man's terrorist etc...

[thierry henry]

Going way off topic, but I know there are Serbs out there who are well educated and intelligent, but who refuse to accept that a genocide ever occurred in the late 90s, or even that anything particularly untoward was done.

I have found it is a very deep-rooted belief in their sovereignty over that whole area that defies attempts at articulation.

[Goughy]

Going way off topic, but I know there are Serbs out there who are well educated and intelligent, but who refuse to accept that a genocide ever occurred in the late 90s, or even that anything particularly untoward was done.

I have found it is a very deep-rooted belief in their sovereignty over that whole area that defies attempts at articulation.

Actually thats getting back on topic

The first line of this thread is about how the rights or wrong of a point isnt important but to outline viewpoints commonly held by people from a different perspective that may not be the same as our own or what we grew up with.