Comments on: Hatoyama Seeks ‘Fraternal’ Union in East Asia

By: Guyjin » Blog Archive » Why Hatoyama Failed

Guyjin » Blog Archive » Why Hatoyama Failed — Mon, 07 Jun 2010 21:05:52 +0000

[...] ‘yuai’, ‘climate change‘, ‘nuclear disarmament’, and ‘fraternal unions in East Asia‘. But ultimately, in order to lead a group of people with differing aspirations and goals, a [...]

By: Guyjin » Blog Archive » Guyjin Article Featured at ‘Searchina’

Fri, 25 Sep 2009 12:34:35 +0000

[...] through Asia, and the editors there have translated some key points from my September 22 article, Hatoyama Seeks ‘Fraternal’ Union in East Asia. The link to the Japanese language article is [...]

By: ( ^o^ )Ｖ

( ^o^ )Ｖ — Fri, 25 Sep 2009 04:16:08 +0000

I do think so ,too.
Japan is very different from China in everything.
For example,
Japn is a democratic country and depends on America in national security.
On the other hand, China is an autocracy by the Cmmunist Party and oppresses minority race in China.It also has nuclear weapons and reinforces armaments,especially its navay development remarkable.
It’s almost impossible for Japan to build East Asia Union wtih China.
I respect prime minister Hatoyama .
I believe that statesman should be a realist and patriot.
I’m afraid he is a very idealist.
His policy isn’t discussed at all in the japanese parliament(Diet) and is very dangerous for Japan.
It needs a thorough review.

By: Guyjin » Blog Archive » Hatoyama Adresses UN: Including Text and Video Links

Fri, 25 Sep 2009 01:57:54 +0000

[...] And you can also see my earlier article about Hatoyama’s ideas for an East Asian community here. I should just say on that last point that at least in today’s speech Hatoyama acknowledges [...]

By: guyjin

guyjin — Thu, 24 Sep 2009 01:05:08 +0000

I’m certainly not ignorant to your point about historical influences darg, but I think you are massively downplaying the ‘lot of history since’. Neither Japan nor China (nor Korea for that matter) bare much of a resemblance to their former selves. Not politically, socially, linguistically, religiously, or ideologically (When I speak of linguistics, I mean that the original influences of, for example, China on Japan, are now FAR less significant in Japanese society and culture than they were hundreds and thousands of years ago). That is my point. A LOT would need to change for there to be enough of a platform for these countries to be able to build a true union. And I don’t see that happening any time soon…

By: darg

darg — Thu, 24 Sep 2009 00:48:22 +0000

I’m guessing you read the op ed Hatoyama had out in the NYT about a month back, right? It talks about his views that Japan should be closer with its (geographically) closer neighbors.

You talk about there not being the cultural ties in E. Asia as there are in Europe, but cultural ties are actually what define the East Asian region in the first place. The most common definition of East Asia as I know it is the sphere of influence of ancient China when it was the “Middle Country”. China, the Korean continent, Japan, and sometimes northern Vietnam as you point out are all places which at one point used Chinese characters, and heavily borrowed concepts from Buddhism (from India but via China), Confucianism and Chinese culture in general. All but Japan were ruled by China at one point or another as well. China was a cultural and learning center for the region, the lasting effects of which can still be seen to this day.

There’s certainly been a lot of history since, but the roots tying the eastern Asian region together are only a few hundred years off Rome’s spread of Christianity.

By: Japundit

Japundit — Tue, 22 Sep 2009 10:23:44 +0000

Story added…

Your story has been featured on Japundit!

Here is the link: http://www.japundit.com/China/Hatoyama_Seeks_Fraternal_Union_in_East_Asia...