Netaji's Addresses on Azad Hind Radio

Note: It is copied material

Orwell: The War Commentaries; West, W. J.

Netaji's Addresses on Azad Hind Radio:

I'am compiling some of the addresses of Netaji Bose on Azad Hind Radio on this page. At the beginning is the Manifesto of the Radio service which transmitted out of Berlin during the Second World War. I intend to study the role of India and Indians in general during the Second World War. I've passively absorbed whatever i've been taught in school, in my history textbooks, and other pervading 'conventional wisdom' about these issues. Since India wasnt an independent country when WW II took place, and immidiately after India went through the traumatising Event of Partition and Indepenence, i believe very little historical work has been done about India's role in WW II. My impression, from what i've been taught, is that Netaji chose a different path than the Congress and did heroic deeds, culminating in his death in a plane crash off Formosa. This approach of Netaji's seemed very attractive and romantic at the agge i was told about it. On the other hand, Nehru more-or-less decided to support the British and this led to active miletary deployment of Indian troops in many different theaters of War. Again, i believe more research has to be done, and more importantly more people have to be made aware of what role, if any, this played in the entire scheme of things. Its only lately did i realise that Gandhiji took a adamantly pacifist approach to WW II. In fact, Gandhiji was prepared to continue his non-violent resistance against the Japanese, if they were to sieze control of India after a military conflict with Britain; but he did not endorse Indians fighting the Japanese to avert this from happening. I personally find this view extremely disturbing. In any case, it seems to me that Nehru alone (who refused to arrange a meeting with Missoulini and/or Hitler when he was in Europe, is spite of repeated requests) truely understood the importance of WW II, the importance of India's role in it and what implications this Event will have on India's future. 

I intend to provide sufficient proof for the claim i've made in the last sentence above in the pages here, and provide other relavant references for the interested.

The Manifesto of The Azad Hind Radio, 19 Jan. 1942

Azad Hind radio service is organised by Azad Hind, an organisation embracing all Indians living abroad. It is only after extreme effort that it has become possible for us to bring into existence such an organisation. In these politically disturbed times it is absolutely necessary, at home as well as abroad, that we must stand together, and keep in touch with one another. We decided it was our duty to provide a political platform on which all Indians living abroad can work hand in hand, before we spoke to you. We had to wait long, but it was not in vain. We are filled with unlimited joy that we can speak to you today, in the same name of all Indians living outside India, who are still free from British and foreign control, and can express their political opinions. 

Azad Hind will be operating in many parts of the world. Its activities are manifold and wide-spread, and radio-service is its latest enterprise. We attach great importance to it for it is the only way open to us of bringing to your ears our voice and feelings. We are free from British propoganda and control, and can view world affairs from a purely nationalist point of view. We know there are people in India not so fortunate, and we think it our moral duty to acquaint you with the world events, and to win your confidence in our activities to achieve freedom for our dear Motherland. Let it become a medium for co-operation between those outside and those inside India. The distinguishing feature will be that out transmission will be by Indians and for Indians. To most of the Indian public the only channel of information is British, and thus they imbibe unconsciously the British propoganda, and live in an unreal world. Some of you might listen to other foreign stations to learn the so-called 'other side of the picture', but this in no way compensates for the absence of a national radio. People who listen to foreign stations do not take advantage of the news andcomments because of their deep suspiscion of false propoganda, and such a prejudicial state of mind prevents them from distinguishing the truth. Therefore many listerners get an altogether false picture of the international situation. The right way to know world affairs is to listen to sources on whihc you can rely, and that will be the special duty of our transmitter. We want to prepare India for a fight for full national Independence. The time has come to act. If we want our freedom we must pursue a logical but bold policy.

India's hour of Destiny, 28 Feb. 1942

Sisters and brothers. For about a year I have waited in silence and in patience for the march of events and now that the hour has struck I Come forward to speak. The fall of Singapore means the collapse of the Bristish Empire, the end of the iniquitous regime which it has symbolised, and the dawn of a new era in Indian history. The Indian people, who have long suffered from the humiliation of foreign yoke and have been ruined spiritually, culturally, politically and economically while under Bristish domination, now must offer their humle thanks to the Almighty for the auspicious even which bears for India the promise of life and freedom. Bristish imperialism has, in modern history, been the most diabolical enemy of freedom and the most formidable obstacle to progress. Because of it, a very large section of mankind has been kept enslaved and in India alone about one fifth of the human race has been ruthlessly suppressed and persecuted. Fot other nations British Imperialism may be the enemy of today, but for India it is the eternal foe. Between these two there can be neither peace nor compromise and the enemies of British imperialism are today our natural friends. 

The outside world hears, from time to time, voices from India claiming to speak either in the name of the All India National Congress or of the Indian people, but these voices come through channels of British propoganda and nobody should make the fatal mistake of regarding them as representative of free India. As is natural for a land that has been under foreign domination, the Bristish officers have endevoured to create divisions among the Indian people. As a consequence, we find in India some who openly support British Imperialism ans who, whether intentionally or unintentionally, help the British cause, often camouflaging their real motives by talking of cooperation with Chungking China, Russia and other allies of England. There is, however, a vast majority of Indian people who will have no compromise with British imperialsim but will fight on till full independance is achieved. Owing to wartime conditions in India, the voice of these freedom-loving Indians cannot cross the frontiers of the country, but we, who have faught for more than two decades for our national emancipation, know exactly what out countrymen think and feel today. 

Standing at one of the cross-roads of world history, I solemnly declare on behalf of all freedom loving Indians in India and abroad, that we shall continue to fight British imperialism till India is once again the mistress of her own destiny. During this struggle, and in the reconstruction that will follow, we shall heartily cooperate with all those who help us to overthrow the common enemy. I am confident that, in this sacred struggle, the vast majority of Indian people will be with us. No manoeuvre, intrigue or conspiracy on the part of agents of Anglo-American imperialism, however prominent they may be and to whichever nationality they may belong, can throw dust in the eyes of the Indian people, or divert them from the path of patriotic duty. The hour of India's salvation is at hand. India will now rise and break the chains of servitude that have bound her so long. Through India's liberation Asia and the world will move forward towards the larger goal of human emancipation.

Message to Indians, 20 July 1942.

Recent happenings in the various theaters of war will have unavoidable repurcussions in India. It behoves Indians to forge ahead in the task of achieving national emancipation. The British Empire has two lungs - Egypt and India. Without Egypt that Empire would be reduced to one lung - India. If that lung is also put out of action death will immidiately follow. British politicians and propogandists never visualised a situation such as that facing them today. The reverses in Russia have been reacting on Britain and seriously affecting public morale. The declaration of Egyptian independence made by the Axis powers on entering Egypt had a profound affect on the Egyptians who have now been siezed with a desire to fight boldly for their independence. Our countrymen must have noticed that, since the situation in North Africa became critical for the British forces, feelers for a compromise have been sent out ot Indian leaders, largely through American and Chinese middlemen now living in India. On the other hand, Conservatives who will hang on to their Empire to the very last, show no sign of reconciliation. The Indian people have fully understood the imperialist role of Roosevelt and his desire to supplant the dying British Empire. Consequently, there is no apprehension whatever that our countrymen will be turned from the path of national duty by the smiles or frowns of American politicians. Unfortunately, there are people still carried away by their sympathy for other nations. They do not seem to realise the great change which has taken place in the world situation during the last three years. It would be the height of folly to cling to a past which does not exist today. 

For some time past I have been standing outside the circuit of British imperialism as the one (?dog) of Indian Nationalism. It is my duty to tell you what I see and hear and advice you as to the best means of achieving out national liberation, and to do my utmost to further our national cause whereever I may happen to be. The only master I have served and shall serve, is India. Whetever I have done or may do, has been and will be, in accordance to the wishes of the vast majority of my countrymen. Despite all obstacles, I remain in constant contact with my countrymen in India so that there may be the fullest accord between the policy followed by us at home and abroad. In spite of all efforts of British politicians to manufacture differences between the Indian people, andto exaggerate slight existing differences, and of all bluff and bluster indulged in by the BBC, the whole world knows that the vast majority of Indian people are determined to overthrow the British yoke. The bold stand taken by our countrymen at home, despite favours and threats, has enabled Indians abroad to hold their head erect with pride. Let me now tell you that the fundamental feature of the present World War is the tragic efforts of Britain and America to hold on to their imperialist tradition, and the equally determined efforts of some other powers to overthrow Britain and America. From the point of view of Indian Nationalism every otherfeature is secondary. Every Indian has to answer immediately: 'Do I want Britain and America to win this war?' If Britain has recognised full independence of India there would have been some justification for desiring her to win, but the British have stubbornly refused to grant us our liberty. Perhaps they feel if India is lost, their Empire will virtually cease to exist. The Indian people have refused to accept the empty promise of Dominion Status after the war and are convinced that and Anglo-American victory will mean a continued enslavement of India and several other nations. Consequently, I say that any Indian who wishes Britain to win this war must be branded unpatriotic and dishonourable. It should be clear to every thinking man that only through the defeat and break-up of the British Empire can India obtain her liberty. 

Is it the duty of the Indian people to work for the destruction of that Empire. By stroke of good luck we find today that several other Powers are striving to tear the British Empire to pieces. We should be greatful for the help given by Italy, Germany and Japan. It is for the Indian people to decide whether they should take any assistance in their struggle for liberty, but should they need such help, they will be perfectly justified in taking it. The less help India requires from outside, the better for her, however. No earthly calculation can offer the slightest hope for a British victory. Why, then, should there be regular attempts to compromise with Britain after every major military defeat suffered by her? They are a waste of time and probably do the Indian people infinite harm by side-tracking the revolutionary energy of the masses. There are three course open to the Indian people at present - firstly, to side openly with Britain; Secondly, to maintain strict neutrality; and thirdly, openly to enter the lists against Britain. To side with Britain will mean sharing her defeat and opening a new chapter of slavery in India. To maintain neutrality would mean a wiser course of action, but it would not entitle us to liberty on our own merits. In that case, we should have to accept liberty as a gift from the victorious enemies of Britain. Actively to fight against Britain would entitle us to liberty, by virtue of our own efforts and sacrifice and not by the mercy of any power. Such liberty can be preserved in future through our own strength. If we do not play a dramatic role in the struggle against Britain, we shall either not secure out freedom at all, or ,if we get it as a gift, we shall not be able to retain it. On the contarary, if we fight now, we shall not only win our freedom soon, but be able to preserve it forever. Is it not a suicidal policy to think of a compromise with a Power which will soon disappear from the face of the Earth? If any Indian has not the strenght to fight for his country's freedom, the least he can do is to remain entirely passive, but refuse to enter into any compromise. 

The height of folly for an Indian would be to offer to fight for Britain in return for a compromise. Such an agreement is altogether dishonourable. What interest has India in Europe or Africa or the British Empire, that she should go to war on the side of Britain? The only honourable course for Indians is to untilise the present crisis and fight for Indian independence, which is now within easy reach. It is my duty to draw your attention to the consequences that will follow if we enter into a compromise with Britain. There are people, including some congressmen, who, in the event of a compromise, are prepared, not only to tolerate foreign troops in India, but also permit India to be used as a military base by Britain. Such a policy is as pernicious as that of active participation in war. No independant state will ever allow foreign troops to occupy its territory or to conduct military operations from bases within that territory. That would be the very negation of independence. It should be remembered that if British, American and Chinese troops are allowed to operate from Indian bases, the enemies of Britain will certainly attack them and India will become a theater of war. It is a back-door method of dragging India into the war and submitting her to the ineveitable horrors which will follow. Some of our countrymen are carrying out propoganda in favour of co-operating with Britain's war effort, but are comouflaging their real intentions by talking of helping China. Every Indian would like to help China, but the question is- does Chungking represent the real China? Did now Marshall Chiang Kai-Shek send troops to Burma to help the British retain their domination? Did not Chungking Ambassador in London publicly declare the other day that Britain would try to reconquer Burma? It seems clear that Chungking is an Anglo-American puppet. I am sure it is possible for Chungking to come to an honourable agreement with Tokyo. Britain's propoganda machinery has been trying to hoodwick the unsophisticated Indian people and to exploit thier poverty, thereby recruiting them for the army, the police, the civic gaurd and similar organisations. Yout endevour should be to keep them out of such organisations, but if you fail to do so, you should send nationalists and revelutionaries into all these bodies. They should recieve all the training the British can give, and use it later for the benefit of the Indian revolution. It is indeed gratifying to know that, in the new Indian Army built up by the British since 1939, we have a fair percentage of friends and supporters. That percentage has to be increased still further in the days to come. This is how revolutions have been made all over the world, and history will repeat itself in India. To all those in internment and prison, I send once again my tribute of love and fraternal greetings. We who are outside India are continuing the battle, and know that the day of Indian liberation is at hand. Once again, I pledge myself to carry on relentlessly the fight for India's independence until full success is achieved. Once again, I assure you, that my co-operation with other Powers has been, and always be, on the basis of a complete unconditional independence of India. When the hour comes, I shall be at your side in order to lead the Indian revolution to its glorious conclusion. 

Then it will be your task to take over the responsibility. As I told Mahatma Gandhi in my last talk with him in 1940, when my mission is over and India is liberated, I shall appear before him once again. Till then, let us all go on fighting with his own weapons in his own place, but all agreed with the common cause and equally determined to bring about the speedy destruction of the British Empire!

Guerrilla war and plan of action, 4 Sept. 1942

Friends, I want to congratualte you most heartily on your achievements this fortnight. There is no doubt you did a lot of careful thinking and planning before the storm actually burst. There can also be no doubt that you set up in good time an underground organization to carry on the campaign, even when the leading men were cast in prison. Perhaps most creditable of all was your settin up a transmitting radio station on behalf of the Indian National Congress, to direct and guide the whole movement from one center. Your achievements have taken the enemy by surprise, and outwitted them completely. The prestige of India all over the world has gone up tremendously, and Indian national abroad can now hold their head erect with dignity and pride. This is the last and final struggle that we are waging against British imerialism, and it behoves us, therefore, to look out in advance for any dangers and pitfalls that may beset our path. If we are forewarned we shall also be forearmed, and if we are forearmed our success is guaranteed. 

There are four dangers about which I should like to forewarn you. Firstly, the British Empire, which is now going through a process of volutary liquidation and is in the hands of auctioneers of Wall Street, may bring in more troops from America, from China and from Africa. We have already in India, American and Chinese troops, and we have in ceylon African and negro troops, and these... forces,... of the India..., have been growing more and more friendly towards us in recent months. Secondly, the British Government, in its desparation, may resort to more brutal measures for supressing our movement in the days to come. Thirdly, there may be a gradual weakening of our forces from within, after some months, owing to a feeling that non-violent resistance cannot prevail against guns and bombs. Fourthly, in such psychological moment, the agents of British imperialism may again put forward an offer or a compromise, and some of you may then be inclined to accept it as a lesser evil than failure. 

Friends, it is my duty to warn you here that Britain will never surrender to India's demand for independance. India is the jewel of the British Empire. It is for preserving this jewel that Britain in now fighting. To this end she will fight to the very last. She will debase herself to an extent and stoop to any humiliation, so long as she can retain her hold over India. This is why Mr. Winston Churchill, the high priest of imperialism, the arch-enemy of Indian nationalism and the sworn opponent of all forms of Socialism, swallowed his imperialist pride and presented himself at the gates of the Kremlin.If the agents of Brtitsh imperialism again put forward feelers for a compromise, it will not be for the purpose of granting India's national demands, but only for creating confusion within our land and therby sabotaging our movement morally. It will, therefor, be our solemn duty to prosecute the campaign without any sort of compromise, till the last Britisher is expelled from the soil of India. 

I must also tell you that in this fight between nationalist India and imperialist Britain the latter does not depend exclusively on her strength, nor do we. We know that today India does not stand isolated from the rest of the world. We, too, have powerful friends and allies who will gladly help us (and contrive?) to do so. Moreover, we are convinced that, as a result of shattering defeats which Britain has been suffering in all the theaters of war, her empire will soon collapse and break up. The next success in this direction will be the early expulsion of the British from Egypt. When the final dismemberment of the British Empire takes place, power will automatically come into the hands of the Indian people. Since our final victory will not come as a result of our effort alone, it does not matter in the least if we in India meet the temporary setbacks when confronted with machine-guns, bombs, tanks and aeroplanes. Our stategy should consist of sticking to our guns and continuing the campaign in spite of all obstacles and setbacks, to be firm in our belief that Britain will soon be overthrown, and with the dissolution of her Empire, India will automatically win her freedom. 

Friends, I have already assured that whatever I have been doing abroad is in accordance with the wishes of a very large section of my countrymen, and I shall never do anything which public opinion in India will not enthusiastically endorse. Ever since I left home I have remained in constant contact with my countrymen at home through more channels than one, in spite of all the efforts of the intelligence... or of the British Secret Service to prevent it. During the last few months, you have had proof of my close contact with my countrymen in India, as many of you know by now how you can communicate with me whenever you so desire. It is no longer possible for the British to prevent my getting into India or out whenever I want to do so. If the British authorities think they know all about me I am glad, for I shall one day be able to give them the shock of their lives. If they had been as clever as they somethimes think they are, I should have been lying in a prison cell today, instead of fighting India's battle all over the world. 

Friends, this is the time when all the countries suppressed or dominated by the satanic British Government are either in revolt or preparing for one. If the whole of India joins in this fight we shall not only effect out emanicipation speedily, but we shall also expedite the liberation of all the countries from Egypt to Iran. On th other hand, if Indian people were to remain inactive, the enemies of Britain would take the initiative in expelling the Britisher from India. The British Empire is in any case doomed, and the only question is as to what will happen to us when its final dissolution takes place. Shall we obtain our freedom as a gift from foreign Powers, or shall we win by our own effort? I would request Mr. Jinnah, Mr (J.K.?), and all those leaders who still think of a compromise with Britain, to realise for once that in the world of tommorow there will be no British Empire. All those individuals, groups or parties who now participate in the fight for freedom will have an honoured place in free India, but those who still hang on to the coat-tails of our British rulers will naturally be nonentities in the future. 

You will be interested to know that British politicians are today terribly upset that the Indian people in general are not prepared to resist or oppose the civil disobedience campaign, even if they are not prepared to actively participate in it. It is but natural that the Indian people should take up this attitude. They know that the British are goingto be driven out of India soon, as they have already been expelled from Burma. Consequently, all those who now oppose the Nationalist Movement will have to pay for it rather dearly at the end, when we come out victorious. 

Friends, I appeal most earnestly to my countrymen who are in the British armed forces not to use their weapons against their brothers and sisters fighting for the country's emancipation. I hope that in every crisis they will refuse to fire on the Indian people, and that, when a suitable opportunity comes, they will point their rifles at their alien oppressors. I also appeal to my countrymen who are seamen or Lascars not to risk their lives any longer in the service of the British. They know very well how badly they and their families are treated as compared to British seamen. When i was in Europe a few months ago I met some Indian seamen who had been rescues from torpedoes ships. Their experience had been horrible, and I was told many more seamen had lost their lives at sea than could be rescued from the sinking ships. If Indian seamen now sacrifice themselves in the service of a Government that is going to disappear soon, nobody will look at them or care for them or their families in future. 

In this connection, I appeal also to all parties or groups who consider themselves to be Nationalists or anti-Imperialists to come forward and join in the epic struggle going on. I appeal to the progressive elements in the Moslem League, with some of whom i had the privilage of cooperating in the work of the Calcutta Municipal Corporation in 1940. I appeal to the brave Moslem..., the Nationalist Moslem Party of India, that started in 1939 the civil disobedience against Britain's war effort long before any other party did so. I appeal to the Jamat Ulama, the only representative organisation of the Ulamas, or Muslim devines of India, led by that distinguished patriot, Mufti (? Gefit Ulla). I appeal to the Azad Muslim League. I appeal to the Akali Dull, the Nationalist Sikh Party of India and to its leader, (? Massa Parossi) and, last but not least, I appeal to the (? Predar) Party of Bengal, which commands the confidence of the Moslem Presidency of that province, and is led by a well known patriot. I have no doubt that if all these organisations plunged into the struggle, the day of India's salvation will be drawn nearer.

Friends, the campaign now going on in India may be described as a non-violent guerrilla war. In this guerrilla war, the tactics of dispersion have to be employed. We shall spread our activities all over the country, so that the British police and military will not be able to concentrate their attack on one point. In keeping with the principles of guerrilla warfare, we should also be as mobile as possible. The authorities should never be able to predict where our activities will emerge next. By continually harassing them in this manner, their nerves should be worn down, but to achieve this result the campaign has to be carried on for months without any break. Then, we you already know, I have been through all the campaigns between 1921 and 1940 and i know very well the causes of our failure in the past. Of late i have had the opportunity of taking expert advice with regard to the tactics of guerrilla warfare, and i am now in a position to offer you some suggestions as to how the present campaign should be brought to a successful conclusion. 

The object of this guerrilla campaign will be two-fold: firstly, to destroy Britain's war production in India, and secondly, to paralyse British administration. Keeping this twofold object in view, every section of the community should participate in the struggle. First, peasants should stop paying all taxes and rents that directly or indirectly bring revenue to the Government. Second, workers in all war industries should either launch a stay-in strike on a demand for higher wages, or they should try to hamper production by conducting a go-slow campaign inside the factories. They should also carry out small acts of sabotage, like removing nuts and bolts from machines, etc. Third, students should give a fitting reply to the threat of expulsion held out by provincial Governments and boycott schools and colleges with greater enthusiasm than before. They should organise secret guerrilla bands for carrying on sabotage in different parts of the country. They should also invent new ways of annoying the British authorities: for example burning stamps, etc. in post offices, shouting at Englishmen when they appear on the streets, creating noise and nuisance in Government offices, destroying British monuments, etc. Fourth, women and especially girl students should do underground work of all kinds, especially as secret messengers. They should also provide shelter for men who fight. Fifth, Governmenr officials prepared to help the campaign secretly should not think of resigning their posts at this stage. Clerks in Government offices and war industries should give all available secret information to the fighters outside and try to hamper war production by working inefficiently and slowly. Sixth, servants working in the houses of Britishers should be organised for the purpose of giving trouble and causing discomfort to their masters, for example by demanding higher salaries, cooking and serving bad food and drink, etc. Seventh, businessmen should give up all business with all English firms, banks, insurance companies, etc. 

For the general public I suggest the following plan for work. Boycott of British goods, including British stores and Government stores as well; total boycott of all Britishers in India and all Indians who are genuinely pro-British. Holding public meetings and demonstrations in spite of official prohibition. Publishing Secret bulletins and setting up secret radio stations. Burning Anglo-Indian and pro-British newspapers in public. Marching to the houses of government officals and demanding their departure from India. Occupying government offices and institutions, like law courts, Secretariate buildings, etc., with a view of dislocating the administration. Punishing police officers and prison officials who oppress or persecute the people. Erecting barricades in streets whenever there is likelihood of a clash with the police and the military. Setting fire to Government offices and factories working for war purposes. Travelling without tickets in railway trains in large numbers. Interrupting postal, telegraph and telephone communications as frequently as possible and in different places. Interrupting railway, bus or tram services, whenever there is a possibility of hampering the transport of soldiers or war materials. Storming and destroying police stations, railways and gaols in isolated places. Carrying on agitations for the release of political prisoners. 

Friends, I can assure you that if only a part of this paln is put into operation all over the country, the administrative machinery can be brought to a standstill and war production... In this direction, I must remind you that, in a non-violent guerrilla campaign, the peasantry always plays a decisive part. I am glad to notice that in several provinces, for example in Behar and the Central Provinces, the peasants are already on the forefront. I earnestly hope that... and the peasant leaders, who, with the Forward Bloc, started the fight in April 1940, long before Mahatma Gandhi did, will now lead the campaign to a victorious conclusion. We want Swaraj for the masses, Swaraj for the peasants and workers. Consequently, the peasants and workers must be in the front-line of the struggle, for they who fight and win liberty always inherit power and responsibility. Then it is encouraging to hear that, for the first time, the people of the Indian States have begun to participate in an all-India national struggle. Reports to that effect have already come in from Baroda, Mysore, Hyderabad, and Kashmir, and I am confident that the day is not far off when the States in general will line up with the people in British India and form a common front against the combine strength of British imperialism and the Indian princes. Most gratifying of all is the news that the clarion call of liberty has reached the ears and the hearts of our soldiers at home and abroad. In Meerut and other places in India, and also in Egypt, Indian soldiers have revolted. They have no doubt been court-martialled and put down with characteristic imperialist brutality, but the fire is spreading from one place to another. A large number of Indian soldiers have voluntarily deserted to the Axis forces in Egypt, and they have been welcomed with open arms by the latter. As a consequence all the Indian fighting Indian units have been withdrawn from the El Alamein Front, as being unreliable. No wonder some Indian flunkeys of British imperialism have been hastily brought up from India in order to influence the Indian troops, but their efforts have so far failed. In fact, even the London radio announces on 2nd September - that is yesterday - that Sir Sikander Hyad Khan had recieved many complaints from Indian soldiers against British officers, and that the soldiers wanted to g ohome on leave just as the British soldiers were allowed to do. In conclusion, I desire to draw your attention to the 6th September, 1942, on which day the Viceroy of India desires pro-British demonstrations to be organised. In accordance with the appeal of the National Congress Radio, I call upon you, friends, to organise from your side an all-India Day on the 6th September for opposing and, if necessary, breaking up all Governmental demonstrations, and for holding counter-demonstrations demanding that the Britishers should leave India at once. In other words, observe the 6th September as a National Quit India Day - not only British India but in the states as well. Let there be meetings and demonstrations from one end of India to the other. Let the sky be rent with the shouts of "Go back, John Bull" ('Ungrez chale jao') and write the words 'Go Back!' and 'Chale Jao' on every concievable place, on the walls, on the trees, on the tram-cars, on the buses, on the trains, in fact, everywhere. And, last but not least, flood the whole country with the letters 'Q.I.', so that wherever the Britisher may turn his eyes, he will see these large letters 'Q.I.' staring him in the face. I am sure, friends, that if you organize properly a National Quit India Day on the 6ht September, you will rouse such trmendous revolutionary enthusiasm among millions of our countrymen that, on that memorable day, you will also, sound the death-knell of British imperialism in India...

References:-

Orwell: The War Commentaries; West, W. J.

A Critical Comparison Between Japanese and American Propaganda during World War II

Source: https://www.msu.edu/~navarro6/srop.html

A Critical Comparison Between Japanese and American 

Propaganda during World War II.

Anthony V. Navarro

Hakko Ichiu. (“Eight corner of the World under one roof.”) 

                                                      Japanese War Slogan

Hostilities exist. There is no blinking at the fact that that our people, our territory and our interests are in grave danger.                                                                                                     President Roosevelt

    World War II was one of the most monumental events in history and certainly one of the most significant events in the 20th century.  The catalyst for drawing the United States fully into the war was the bombing of Pearl Harbor.  The series of confrontational events that led up to Pearl Harbor and the events that followed up until the Japanese surrender in 1945, were waged on the political, economic, and military fronts, but one aspect of the war which is sometimes overlooked is the war waged on the social front.  What makes the social aspect of war so significant is that it involves a dynamic within the human person.  In time of war, there is killing, violence, and hate, all stirred up from within.  Thoughts and emotions come into play.  Ideologies and philosophies, ways of life, and cultures clash.  War is no longer only between soldiers on a battlefield but between nations and their ideas.  And in order to make a whole nation of people support the war with mind and spirit, there needs to be influence.  That influence is propaganda. 

    Much of the social warfare between the United States and Japan involved instilling within their people both a strong nationalistic pride for their own country as well as an incendiary hatred for the other.  This was done with the help of the media—newspapers, books, radio, and film—that were consequently used as propaganda against the enemy.  Much of the material was racist and catered to such ideas as racial inferiority and ethnic supremacy.  One’s own nation was always the civilized one while the enemy was depicted as barbaric, sub-human, and in some cases, demonic. 

    We imbibe a flood of information each day from numerous sources—radio, film, books, newspapers, magazines, and advertisements.  We are consciously and subconsciously told what to think, what to do, how to feel, and how to behave.  Although news sources attempt to be as objective as possible, there is always a grain of cultural salt that factors into how people interpret that objective information.  Socioeconomic conditions, political situations, and social atmosphere not only contribute to how news and information are interpreted, but are also reflected in them.  Media is an art, and art is a way of communicating ideas.  Those ideas are what drive nations and people, to think and act. And during time of war, a nation often tries to stir up a common sense of purpose under which its people can unite. 

    The inspiring quotes above spurred on the war spirit.  The first was a Japanese World War II slogan alluding to the Emperor Jimmu, the first emperor of Japan.  In an 8th Century literary collection, his words are recalled that the “eight corners of the world be united under one roof” creating a brotherhood of races.  The second was spoken by President Frank Roosevelt in his declaration of war to Congress shortly after the Japanese bombing of Pearl Harbor. Potent words such as these, which were plastered on posters and sung in war slogans, reinforced a sense of duty and instilled a kind of vengeful spirit in not only those fighting on the battlefields but also in the people supporting them on the home front.  Catchy slogans and catch phrases quickly became part of popular culture. 

    If a picture is worth a thousand words, then the images generated from World War II would speak endless volumes.  Words are powerful, but some of the images in wartime posters drew attention more vividly because they attracted an audience on a wider scale.  Posters urging citizens to conserve resources, increase labor production to “help our troops,” or simply slogans summoning an increase national pride were posted in every subway station, train station, bus stop, on every billboard and street corner in every city.  Ads to buy war bonds or join the armed forces were printed in nearly every magazine and newspaper.  So even if one covered one’s ears to the messages broadcast over the airwaves, one couldn’t escape the constant bombardment of visual stimuli. 

    Radio and film, however, may have been the most effective means of reaching its audience simply by virtue of its medium.  New technology, such as radio and motion pictures, were capable of sending information over a much greater scale.  Moving pictures and audible words and music brought to life what was only still and static in a book or poster.  In 1942, the Academy Award for best documentary went to Frank Capra’s Why We Fight, which was the first of a series of war documentaries he made under the commission of the U.S. military.  Not to be outdone, the Japanese had their own cinematic propaganda.  Chocolate and Soldiers and The Story of Tank Commander Nishizumi, two very popular Japanese wartime films, were effective as propaganda tools for Japanese audiences.  Anthropologist Ruth Benedict once exclaimed, “Japanese films have a propaganda courage which Americans films have usually lacked” (Dower 35).  Japanese movies were not afraid to show weakness and hardship that were associated with war.  Japanese films showed a lot of sacrifice more so than American films in order to create a more humanistic and endearing empathy for the characters. 

    The Japanese propaganda campaign was not only directed toward the United States but also towards Asian countries whom they sought to conquer.  During the time that the Japanese began studying about the culture and customs of their Western counterparts, America was going through a period of territorial expansion that saw its borders extend to the Pacific but much to the expense of Native Americans. The time period during which Japan became increasingly more interested in Western culture was during the time that America was going through that expansion phase.  In many ways, Japan took on many of the ideas and methods of American expansionism, and, consciously or subconsciously, incorporated them into their own methods of conquest throughout Asia. 

    The media and propaganda were powerful and often silent weapons that targeted human emotions and psyches, and often caused people to feel and think things that they otherwise would not if not exposed to it.  Politics and military actions can only do so much, but if they are driven by human emotions and impulses, they are driven further.  And propaganda was that driving forces of human emotion during World War II. 

“…a date which will live in infamy”

    Admiral William Halsey, who became commander of the South Pacific Forces early on during the World War II made famous the slogan “Kill Japs, kill Japs, kill more Japs.”  So vengeful was his rage following Japan’s attack on Pearl Harbor that his motto under which he would rally his men was “Remember Pearl Harbor—keep ‘em dying.” (Dower 36). 

 Strong rhetoric such as Admiral Halsey’s was not uncommon during the war years.  The rhetoric was so harsh, in fact, the words bordered on genocidal.  Before Pearl Harbor, the United States was already locking horns with German and Italian forces in Europe.  The American views of Hitler’s regime in Germany and Mussolini’s fascist rule in Italy were due in large part to the careful imagery depicted by popular media.  The Office of Strategic Services, or OSS, played a large part in controlling information.  The OSS, which was formed in 1942 as a secret intelligence agency, was headed by William Donovan under the auspices of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.  Its objectives were to analyze secretive information and data and to conduct psychological warfare.  Propaganda material and information was a major component to the psychological tactics used by the OSS.  The task, however, did not involve so much creating new ideas for psychological warfare than it did accentuating and disseminating already existing ones. 

    The spiteful sentiment felt throughout the war among many Americans seemed to stem from much more than simply vengeance for the December 7th attack.  It reflected an already existing racism prompted by Pearl Harbor.  The “yellow” color race code was the branding of choice when referring to the Japanese.  They were the “yellow peril,” and “yellow monkeys.” Even Time magazine in a report on Pearl Harbor used the phrase, “the yellow bastards!”  The New York Times contributed with their own anti-Japanese rhetoric explaining how the Japanese “have kept their savage tradition ‘unbroken through ages eternal,’ from the fabulous age of their savage gods to the present day. 

    A commonly held view was that the Japanese were subhuman or evolutionarily inferior.  It was an all too common idea among not only the Americans but among the other Allies as well.  British Under-Secretary of the Foreign Office Sir Alexander Cadogan referred to the Japanese as “little yellow dwarf slaves” referring to the average height difference between Anglos and Japanese (Aldrich 64). Chiefs of Staff felt “no reason to believe that Japanese standards are even comparable with those of the Italians.” In one of the most famous, and perhaps most fantastic and blatant misconceptions of the Japanese, historian Arthur Marder thought the Japanese to be inherently inferior, especially in the art of war, for several reasons, one being “because of their eye slits… the Japanese fighter pilots could not shoot straight, and Japanese naval officers could not see in the dark” (65).  Captain Vivian from Tokyo said that Japanese were incapable of springing surprise in battle because they have “peculiarly slow brains” (64).  One needs only to obviously site the bombing of Pearl Harbor to disclaim that notion.  Despite this, the West was still convinced during the early part of the war that Japan was of Japan’s inherently inferior.  John Dower offers his explanation:

"Because the Pearl Harbor attack came so unexpectedly—so literally out of the 

blue, as the saying goes—most Westerners also regarded Japan’s imitation of war as high folly… The attack thus managed to reinforce existing impressions of the Japanese as unpredictable and fundamentally irrational—even though, upon calmer appraisal, it might as easily have been interpreted as evidence of the relentless logic of Japanese war planning (44)."

    It is hard to believe that amidst all this anti-Japanese rhetoric, President Roosevelt was totally immune to the circulating sentiment.  He, in fact, was not.  Sir Ronald Campbell, a British delegate in the United States, wrote to Sir Alexander Cadogan about his observations of President Roosevelt.

"He had set one Professor Krdlicka of the Smithsonian Institute, to work on a private study of the effect of racial crossing… The President has asked the Professor why the Japanese were as bad as they were.  The Professor had said the skulls of these people were some 2,000 years less developed than ours (this sounds very little, doesn’t it?). The President asked whether this might account for the nefariousness of the Japanese and had been told it might, as the might well be the basic stock of the Japanese (Sbrega 485)."

    The literature and the rhetoric of the time affected how people viewed the war and viewed the enemy, but the visual art created during the war drew attention more easily and drew a larger audience simply by its nature.  A printed article or quote in a newspaper does not catch the eye quite as easily as a picture. The use of graphic arts in promoting political and social messages was a significant part of America’s propaganda war effort.  Many of the images created during the war-years stand as symbols of their time.  Images such as Uncle Sam pointing, summoning the viewer to “join the army,” or the blue collar woman flexing her muscle encouraging woman to join in the industrial war effort, are cultural icons.  However, not all poster art was as soft-edged as these were.  For example, Figure 1 shows a gruesome image of a Japanese soldier, perhaps even Hideki Tojo himself who was Japan’s War Minister and Premier.

 

             Fig. 1

    The sharp angled features of the figure suggest villainy.  The naked woman thrown sinisterly over his shoulder, almost pornographic in posture, appears the victim of the rape and pillage seen in the background.  The race of the woman grabs the attention of the audience even more.  She is white, most likely American.  The message strikes fear into the viewer and asks the question, “Would you let this to happen?” 

    A common technique used by propagandists was to liken the Japanese to animals like snakes and rats.  But the most common animal used to portray the Japanese was the monkey.  In several posters and editorial cartoons, the Japanese were drawn up as monkeys hanging from trees or lumbering around like big gorillas.  The image of a subhuman primate was key to undercutting the humanity of the enemy.  The enemy was less than human, thus much easier to kill.  Figures 2 and 3 are editorial cartoons that show the use of the simian image in two different ways.  The first is the Japanese as a peculiar object of curiosity.  The second is the Japanese as a savage, untamable beast that should be eradicated by any means.  Figure 2 shows scientists and scholars baffled by their monkey-like Japanese specimen.  One of the scholars holds a document reading “International problem: What goes on in the Japanese mind,” as if the Japanese were a specimen whose behavior was tested and observed like a lab rat.  Despite Japan’s military prowess and technological skills proven in the Pacific, the notion that the Japanese were intellectually inferior was still a stubbornly held popular view.  Editorials such as these reinforced those views even more.  The scientists stand condescendingly over their shorter subject, arms akimbo looking not so much puzzled as they look annoyed.  Note also the raggedy clothes and the stereotypical wooden platform shoes worn by the Japanese man.

       

                Figure 2                                              Figure 3

Figure 3, in a sort of indirect way, offers a solution to the question posed in Figure 2.  Here, a gun labeled “civilization” is pointed at the head of Japan again portrayed as a monkey about to be blown away.  On the chest of the monkey is written “murderers of American fliers.”  This was in reference to the execution of American airmen who crash landed in Japan during the first American bombing raid over Tokyo in 1943.  Notice the face of the monkey.  It neither grovels nor fears the gun that is brandished in its face.  It has no conscience of its heinous actions and would more than likely kill again if not put to death immediately; there is no hope for repentance in this beast. 

    Posters also sounded a call to war for the American people.  The message was that America had been maliciously attacked and would not sit idly by and do nothing.  Not only must America defend herself from her enemies, but the enemy must also be destroyed completely.  Constant references to the December 7th bombing of Pearl Harbor reminded the American people why she was at war and why they should take up arms to help the fight.  Figures 4 and 5 show dark images yet send fiery messages to “Avenge December 7” as printed in Figure 4 in bold, red lettering.  A battleship is blown out of the water in the foreground, and the midshipman, partially hidden in the grimness of the shadows, raises his fist in vengeful defiance.  Figure 5 uses the symbol of America itself, the American flag.  It has been defaced and defiled.  It flies low, tattered and torn amidst the rubble of bombed out ships.  The thick black smoke rising from the disaster invade the peaceful blue sky.  Once again, the words, “Remember Dec. 7th!” are accentuated with a fiery red.  The harrowing superscript solemnly recalls the dead, and that America must take action against the perpetrating Japanese so that these dead “shall not have died in vain” as the poster says.

                

               Figures 4                                       Figure 5

    When discussing the role of popular media in America’s propaganda war campaign, it would be negligent not to mention the role of Hollywood.  During the time of the war, Hollywood created numerous war-related films such as Objective, Burma!, The Bridge on the River Kwai,  The Story of G.I. Joe, and In Which We Serve. 

There were also a number of documentary films created at this time, perhaps the most famous of which was Frank Capra’s Why We Fight series.  Capra, who is noted for such films as It’s a Wonderful Life, and Mr. Smith Goes to Washington, was commissioned by Army Chief of Staff George C. Marshall to create a film series that would be viewed by army men and be used as a learning tool of sorts by the army in order than America would come to “know its enemy.” The primary objectives that Capra had in mind were to rally the American public behind the task to both ‘win the war and win the peace’ (Dower 16). 

    The first of Capra’s series, Prelude to War won acclaim as it took the 1942 Academy Award for Best Documentary.  Because the Why We Fight series was promoted as a documentary series, the films were often seen as objective and true to their nature when in fact they were very propagandous.  In a scene in Prelude to War, a Japanese army is shown marching down Pennsylvania Avenue in Washington, D.C. with the Capitol building in the background.  The script admonishes, “You will see what they did to the men and women of Nanking, Hong Kong, and Manila.  Imagine the field day they’d enjoy if they marched through the streets of Washington.” 

What Capra did here was to allow the Japanese to speak for themselves (he also did this with German and Italian film as well). Capra used captured documentary footage from the enemy (most likely for their own propaganda use) in his films but did so in a manner that favored the U.S. cause.  Capra took captured footage and newsreels, as well as old samurai movies and the like, and skillfully edited.  He deceptively juxtaposed them with images of war crimes, victimized civilians, and of burned down buildings and rubble in China, and the Philippines.  In The Battle of China, the righteousness of America’s presence in China was reinforced with images of a placid and civilized China with scenes of the country side and its people again juxtaposed with scenes of Japan’s army marching in stringent lines ominously infringing upon their Asian neighbors about to disrupt that serenity and calm.  The peaceful scenes of China set contrast to scenes of Japanese atrocities and destruction portrayed a villainous Japan that was out to destroy the peace.  By viewing captured Japanese footage from Japanese film, it would seem much more objective, and much less propagandous, that the Japanese were the true enemy worthy of any and all relentless attacks administered by the United States. 

    This clearly was not objective documentary story telling, but it was exactly the kind of message Marshall and the rest of the Army wanted to send to the American people.  Some of the films were required viewing for many American soldiers being shipped overseas.  They wanted to send the message that Japan, and the other Axis powers, were a loathsome group of villains who would wreak havoc upon civilization not stop unless America and the rest of the Allies stopped them. One technique that Capra used was the utilization of captured enemy war footage. In a somewhat ambiguous shift, the focus of dislike focused not on all Japanese, but rather on the Japanese military.  Capra’s Know Your Enemy—Japan showed pictures of the Japanese peasantry and those civilians in war-torn areas of Japan.  This was also Japan, the Japan that the powers that be ignored and did not seek to help. 

Purity, Pride, and Empire.

    Throughout the war and the years leading up to it, Japan maintained that its campaign through Asia was virtuous and that their Asian Co-Prosperity Sphere would, in the long run, do good for all of Asia under their guidance.  Seeing what Western countries were doing to Asia—the French presence in Southeast Asia, the British in Hong Kong and Singapore, and the United States in the Philippines—Japan sought to “liberate East Asia from white invasion and oppression” (Dower 25).  In 1942, the Japanese government published a booklet entitled The Greater East Asia War and Ourselves (Dai Toa Senso to Warera) describing how the relationship between Asian countries would be like that of a “branch family” (283). 

    Japan promoted the idea that under their leadership, East Asian would come to know greater economic prosperity free from Western influence and independent of Western economic bureaucracy.  Japan’s “Outline of Economic Policies for the Southern Areas” describes Japan’s plans “to assist the economic expansion of the Japanese people in the southern areas on the bases of overall national planning, and to advance economic changes within the Co-Prosperity Sphere” (287).  However, underneath all the rhetoric of a “Greater East Asia” lay hidden agendas as well. 

    Japan often justified their forceful tactics by citing a lack of cooperation from other Asian nations.  Japanese Foreign Minister Koki Hirota wrote:

"It is hardly necessary to say that the basic policy of the Japanese government aims at the stabilization of East Asia through conciliation and cooperation between Japan, Manchoukuo, and China for their common prosperity and well being.  Since, however, China, ignoring our true motive, has mobilized her vast armies against us, we can only counter her step by force of arms (Lasker and Roman 44)."

    Anti-Chinese rhetoric was quite common partly because China was Japan’s largest foe in Asia.  Yet they still maintained their stance of “good intentions.”  Japan was the good parent while the child countries of Asia, as stubborn as they were in the Japanese’ eyes, didn’t know what was good for them.  Japan was always fighting on their side yet felt that she had been constantly snubbed despite her assistance.  In a 1937 statement regarding the Sino-Japanese conflict at the beginning of the century, the Japanese Chamber of Commerce of New York had this to say:

"Back in 1904-05, Japan… fought Czarist Russia… upon Chinese soil.  She fought, first, to save China and, secondly, to save herself.  The two were the same thing, because Russian absorption of China meant Japan’s own eventual doom.  While Japan was fighting to save China, what was China doing? Secretly she entered into an alliance with Russia against Japan (20)."

Japan failed to recognize any wrongdoings it may have committed to other countries.  It maintained adamantly that Japan’s motives were, without question, for good and only good, and that any action taken against other Asian countries, such as China were brought about on account of self-defense. 

     Two very important war-time documents were Kore dake Yomeba Ware wa Kateru (Read this and the War is Won), and Shinmin no Michi (The Way of the Subject).  The first was a pamphlet written by Col. Tsuji Masanobu and his intelligence unit.  It was a small book handed out to all the soldiers before being sent off to the war in South and Southeast Asia.  In it, Western countries were bashed for their greedy holdings in India, most of Southeast Asia, and the Philippines.  The white Westerners were rich, arrogant colonists who subjugated the native people while they reaped the riches and lived lavishly above the poor.  Japanese soldiers read how “money squeezed from the blood of Asians maintains these small white minorities in their luxurious mode of life” (Dower 24).  It was Japan’s duty to free them from the grip of colonialism.  Not only was the West enslaving other nations and stealing their wealth, but they were doing it right in Japan’s backyard to their own fellow Asians.  Shinmin no Michi was an ideological manifesto issued by the Ministry of Education and directed more toward Japan’s domestic audience to teach them what they should aspire to be “as a people, nation and race” (24).  The Allied powers were depicted as the evil greedy ones as once again evident in their colonization of Asian countries.  Their immoral character was further reinforced by their brutal attacks on Pacific Islands and later on Japan itself.  America own track record was put to question, and the Japanese learned more of their atrocities when dealing with slavery to blacks and the mistreatment of minorities and immigrants in their own country, including Asian Americans.  They read about racially motivated violence and the herding of tens of thousands of Japanese immigrants into internment camps.  The objective was clear.  It was Japan’s “divine purpose” to defeat the enemy.

    Japan has traditionally been noted for its artistic advancements especially prints and paintings.  Often known for its simplicity, Japanese art shifted its motif and focused its efforts on the war.  Similar to America’s were Japan’s own call to arms and aid.

                    

            Figure 6                                               Figure 7

The poster in Figure 6 shows a charging Japanese soldier trampling over the British and American flags with a bayonet.  The poster, issued by the Army Ministry, reads “Fire and Never Quit!”  The soldier in Figure 7 points at the viewer, not too unlike Uncle Sam in his poster, and encourages people to join the Japan’s Young Men’s Military Brigade. 

 Of course Japanese propaganda art did not neglect to target the enemy.  In a manner similar to what American did by depicting the Japanese as subhuman apes, the Japanese countered with their own depiction of Americans (and the British as well) as hairy, demonic mongrels.  Figures 8 and 9 demonstrate such imagery.  In the first, a demonic figure with skulls around its neck wears the visage of President Roosevelt.  Similarly in Figure 9, President Roosevelt is shown with the hands and feet of a monster with a single horn protruding from his head.  He sits atop the "Grieving Statue of Liberty," the title of the picture.  She grieves because in the President's one hand, he waives the banner of democracy while in the other he tenaciously grips the stick of dictatorship.  Hanging from the crown of the statue is a striking worker, and a lackadaisical Navy sailor having a good time with the ladies.  The sullen face of the statue reflects the despicable state that the United States is in.  It shows that America is not as strong as she presents herself to be and that its own folly will result in its ultimate demise.  They were not such a formidable enemy that Japan could not defeat.  The United States was weak and vulnerable

                         

              Figure 8                                           Figure 9

Japan, on the other hand, was anything but weak.  They would bring light to the world, ridding it of the Allied forces, represented by the United States, Britain, China, and the Netherlands in Figure 10. Here, Japan’s rising sun blows them away.  A single wooden shoe represents the Dutch.  The Chinese character possesses an animal’s tail, which was a common depiction of the Chinese.  Britain is depicted as a portly figure, and the Americans as a criminal donning a prisoner’s striped uniform.  Notice also the crowns falling off the head of the British and Americans indicative of their wealth and opulence.

 

                        Figure 10

    One aspect of propaganda in which Japan greatly differed from its American counterparts was its audience.  The Americans for the most part did not have an foreign audience.  The figure in Appendix 3 is a pro-American Chinese poster and was one of a handful of exceptions.  The Japanese, on the other hand, had the daunting task of not only conquering these other Asian countries, but also persuading them to join their cause.  The Japanese, if they were to establish a stronghold within their Greater East Asian Co-Prosperity Sphere, they would have to win over the favor of those countries.  Japan had to positively promote their ideas to the Chinese, Koreans, South and Southeast Asians that a unified Asia, under Japanese leadership, free from the capitalist and economic influence of the West, was inherently and naturally good.  Without the support of other Asian nations, Japan’s cause would flounder.  Figure 11 shows Japan extending its helping hand to its Southeast Asian brother in Indonesia, who had been a colonized by the Dutch.  In the background can be seen a Dutch woman fleeing into darkness, away from the light of Japan.  The sun is labeled “Co-Prosperity Sphere.”  Figure 12 shows Churchill, Roosevelt, and Chiang Kai-Shek, each standing with one hand in his coat pocket in a Napoleon-like pose trampling over who appear to be slaves.  They are dark skinned suggesting that they are South Asian or of African decent.  Throughout the war, Japan often used historical accounts of America’s racist past to cite the many racial injustices of the United States.  The Allies are thus greedy and care about nothing except for their own capital gain.  The three leaders all have staunch yet rather comical looks on their face, not as threatening or as strong as they claim to be.  They are still characters, vulnerable and very much able to be defeated by the Japanese.  The ABCD letters in the background stand for the American, British, Chinese, and Dutch.

                   

                Figure 11                                                    Figure 12

    Although the influence of Hollywood and cinema on popular opinion during the war was apparent in the United States, they were not the only ones to use the art of motion pictures to their advantage.  Other Allied countries produced movies as propaganda against the enemy as well did Axis countries.  As for Japan, some critics would say that many of the Japanese films met or even surpassed American propaganda films both in technical quality and creative ingenuity.  However, in the wake of Japan’s defeat after the war, many of their war era films have been long since ignored. 

    Frank Capra, director of the acclaimed U.S. propaganda film series Why We Fight even acknowledged the excellence of Japanese war films. “We can’t beat this kind of thing,” Capra once said. “We make a film like that maybe once in a decade. We haven’t got the actors”  (Dower 34).  Capra was referring to the film Chocolate and Soldiers made in 1938 about a father fighting in China who sends his son letters from the battle field along with chocolate candy wrappers.  A common theme in many Japanese wartime films was that of the valiant soldier—a father, son, brother, or husband—going off to war and dying honorably for his country. 

    For whatever reason, the Japanese cinema tended to shy away from showing images of the enemy.  The anti-Western sentiment was apparent in both literature and in graphic art, but nearly altogether absent in cinema.  The enemy is vague.  They are referred to as karera or “they,” tekihei or “enemy soldier,” Chinese or Korean communists are hizoku or “bandits” (39).  If there was a direct reference to the enemy, it was done so in regards to the enemy’s past actions.  For example, Japan would cite America’s slave past and point to their history of treating their people unfairly.  In contrast, Hollywood depicted Japanese as an outright despicable and atrocious enemy in the present time and would not hold back from using any racial slurs wherever possible. 

    The Japanese did not rely so much on pointing the condemning finger at the enemy to say “look at them, look how evil they are.”  Instead, the overriding theme throughout most, if not all, Japanese film during this time period was purity. Purity was the supreme character trait of the hero (35).  The idea of national, ethnic, and spiritual purity was the cohesive glue that connected all of Japanese film and which made it very appealing to a Japanese audience seeking to make sense of all the fighting going on around them.  This was all the more important during the middle part of the war during which Japan was clearly on the losing side.  The hopeful messages elicited in film boosted the morale of the people when morale was low.  Even though they were losing the battle, their purity, their pride, and their strength as a Japanese people would hold them together in the end. 

    Another characteristic of Japanese war films that separated them from their American counterparts was their ability to appeal to their audience without over-sensationalizing or over-dramatizing their actors.  Their characters were admirable in their purity of character and valor of action but also very simple.  There is no fanaticism, no turbulent rides between the agony of defeat and the joy of victory (35).  In Yoshimura Kenzaburo’s acclaimed 1940 film The Story of Tank Commander Nishizumi, commissioned by Japan’s Ministry of War, the main character sacrifices his own life for his men in battle during the war with China.  For his sacrifice, he is posthumously honored with the title of gunshin or “military god.” 

The films is noted for its dynamic battle scenes, but where Hollywood might have contrived a more moving death scene with dramatic music, Commander Nishizumi’s death is hardly dramatic (37).  In fact, you do not even see his actual death.  In a calm, comforting scene, Nishizumi’s commanding officer at his death bed whispers, “He is sleeping well… he was a good man… he looks just as if he were alive.” 

    This kind of display of self-sacrifice, this total giving up of oneself for the greater good, was an integral part of that one ubiquitous virtue of purity.  The Japanese sacrifice was part of what made them pure in the spiritual sense.  Anthropologist Ruth Benedict commented about Japanese film saying that “the spirit of sacrifice or the subjection of self to pattern was the dominant theme in these films” (34). 

    Documentaries—not in the strictest sense in terms of objectivity but rather like Capra’s propaganda-style documentaries—were also used in Japanese propaganda.  Even before the war when Japan was not at war with the United States, they brought out the suffering aspects of war in order to elicit empathy from audiences.  In 1939, Kamei Fumio’s Fighting Soldiers and Tasaka Tomotaka’s Mud and Soldiers displayed the relentless tedium and emotional drain of the Japanese forces in China. Fumio’s film showed so much suffering.  Unlike U.S. films, which portrayed an invincible U.S. military and carried vengeful, often racist tones, Japan took the position of underdog. Footage from the war with China or with Russia didn’t show so much war itself than it did how the war affected the Japanese.  The directors most likely sought to create empathy and a sense of need even when Japan had the upper hand.  The effect it had was the material as well as moral support from the country.  They were the victims of war who were simply struggling for their own honorable survival amidst the chaos, which they themselves were helping to create. 

 

Manifest Destiny and Co-Prosperity: Euphemisms for Imperialism

    The United States was not fighting Japan simply because of their surprise bombing of Pearl Harbor.  There are even those who might say that the attack really should not have come as much of a surprise at all, that the United States methodically provoked the Japanese to attack in order to give the United States a reason to jump into the war.  Up until that point, the United States had only moderately contributed on the European front, and was looking for a way to join in the fight.  The reasons for the United States entering the war vary, and it would be difficult to argue that they entered the war for any one sole reason.  One explanation is for economic reasons.  The war created jobs and boosted domestic industry.  In Asian, Japan was building a stronghold of Asian nations that included China, Korea, and also the Philippines, which the United States had vested interest in and to whom they were still a major influence.  The United States still had valuable assets that they needed to protect in Asia, as did European nations, such as Great Britain and France who still held colonies in Singapore, Hong Kong, and French Indochina. 

    During World War II, it can be argued that the United States was fighting against imperialist expansionism in the Far East by Japan.  However, deciphering whether or not this was one of America’s primary goals may not be as interesting as pointing out the striking similarities between Japan’s imperialist campaign of the 20th century to that of the United States’ own expansionist movement of the middle and late 19th century. The Japanese and Americans shared one major goal in common: the expansion of its borders by the forceful acquisition or annexation of other peoples’ land for their own increase in natural resources and capital gain. 

    The United States looked Westward as they sought to expand the United States’ ever growing borders. The Lewis and Clark expedition was commissioned to map out the frontier west of the Mississippi.  Although early settlers had already begun exploring lands west of the Appalachians in the 18th century, the Louisiana Purchase in 1803 opened the floodgates to yet more people seeking valuable and arable farmland.  Under the leadership of Sam Houston, Texas declared its independence from Mexico in 1836 and was later annexed by the United States in 1845. Once gold was discovered in California in 1848, the emigration toward the West boomed with pioneers and businessmen alike seeking their own personal fortune. 

The Japanese, not too unlike their American counterparts, sought to expand their borders as well.  Prior to 1868, before the Emperor Meiji was crowned, Japan was locked in feudal disarray, war torn and isolated from the rest of the world.  But when the Emperor Meiji took the throne, he dissolved the old feudal system and sought to modernize and industrialize the islands.  In order to do this, Japan had to be willing to learn from and borrow ideas from industrialized nations such as Great Britain, Germany, and the United States.  In 1873, the Naimusho, or Home Ministry was created to implement economic and industrial policies. 

    America’s movement into the West was fueled by the concept of “Manifest Destiny,” a term coined by Texas journalist John O’Sullivan referring to the idea that it was America’s divine mission, or “destiny,” to spread the American culture and ideals from shore to shore.  The Native American tribes, of course, were but a mere obstacle in the way of that destiny.  Numerous accounts of violence towards them have been documented.  The Natives were savages in the Americans’ eyes, and if they did not accept their ways, they were simply removed or exterminated.  However, it was sometimes made to look as if the Natives were given a fair chance to assimilate, that after much stubborn resistance, American had no choice but to take action against them.  Andrew Jackson, in his statement to congress in 1829 issuing the Removal Act of the Native Americans, saw their removal as for their own good.

“The condition and ulterior destiny of the Indian Tribes within the limits of some of our States, have become objects of much interest and importance.  It has long been the policy of Government to introduce among them the arts of civilization, in the hope of gradually reclaiming them from a wandering life.” 

     -Andrew Jackson, 1829

The Removal Act resulted in thousands of Native Americans being violently mistreated and driven from their land into what was called the Indian Territory, now Oklahoma. 

    The racial attacks not only targeted the Native Americans, however.  Mexicans, Cubans, and Filipinos were often at the brunt end American opinion.  Sam Houston, first president of the Republic of Texas, speaking of the Mexicans, could “see no reason why (America) should not go in… and take their lands” (McCaffrey 68).  Perhaps even more widely read were the words published by the Illinois State Register in 1846 when they called Mexicans “reptiles in the path of progressive democracy… and they must either crawl or be crushed” (69).  President McKinley, after the Spanish-American War saw granting Cuba’s independence would result in “anarchy and misrule.”  Filipinos were “unfit for self-government” and that “there was nothing left for them to do but to take them all and to educate the Filipinos, and uplift and civilize and Christianize them” (McKinley in Horlacher 40).  Little was McKinley aware that the Philippines was already the most Christianized country in Asia. 

    The Japanese in their own dealings with other Asian countries were no different.  They too would use ambiguous language as the United States did. One moment, h=they would relentlessly bash their neighboring countries, the next, praise them for their redeeming qualities.  A prime example of this is the Japanese’ view of Koreans.  Perhaps some of the more colorful propagandous Japanese writing, albeit extremely racist and demeaning writing, was directed toward Korea.  Travel logs described the filth they saw in Korean homes, exaggerated accounts of the use of human excrement in daily living, and the waywardness of the Korean people altogether.   One traveler said the seven major products of Korea were “shit, tobacco, lice, kaesang [courtesans], tigers, pigs, and flies” (Duus 402). 

    Negative descriptions such as these created popular stereotypes about Korea among the Japanese.  Despite this, however, there was an overwhelming sense of parental duty that the Japanese felt toward their Korean “brothers,” that despite their extreme backwardness, they were somehow redeemable.  A journalist wrote that the Koreans were “by no means inferior to the Japanese in industry and endurance, who, if they have the proper leadership, will have a bright future” (408).  Of course, the leadership of which he spoke was that of the Japanese.  The Koreans were simply in a dark period culturally, and with the help of their ethnic “brothers,” the Japanese, they could break them loose of their stolid ineptitude.  This was the general and popular view of the Koreans. 

    Japan’s concept of Hakko Ichiu, or “eight corners under one roof,” was their counter to America’s Manifest Destiny.  Japan catered to the idea of a common Asian race and promoted ethnic unity under Japan’s “roof” of leadership.  This idea stemmed from the 8th Century tale that when Japan was first founded 2,600 years ago, several races inhabited the islands.  It was only natural, therefore, for the races come back together under the Japanese “roof” (223).  But China, the most populous nation in the world, was a tremendous problem to the Japanese expansion effort.  Japan claimed that the “unification” of Japan and China was not only for the good of Japan but for China’s welfare as well. Forceful action was necessary, however, in order to defend themselves from a resistant China.  Foreign Minister Koki Hirota wrote once in an article entitled “The Sino-Japanese Conflict”:

"It is hardly necessary to say that the basic policy of the Japanese government aims at the stabilization of East Asian through conciliation and cooperation between Japan, Manchukuo, and China for their common prosperity and well being.  Since, however, China, ignoring our true motive, has mobilized her vast armies against us, we can only counter her step by force of arms” (Koki in Lasker and Roman 44)."

    Resources drew Americans West.  There was ample land to farm, and homesteader grabbed as much land as they could stake out for themselves.  The Gold Rush brought people flocking to California in search of wealth.  What the East Coast lacked, the West had.  Similarly, Japan’s islands themselves were not rich in natural resources.  Oil and fuel were one of their major imports.  Approximately 80 percent of the land are mountainous terrain and less than ideal for farming.  China, the northern regions around Manchuria in particular, were rich in natural resources and would have been a primary target for Japan to find resources and good farm land. 

    The United States and Japan both sought territorial expansion, and both had forceful opposition. America acted swiftly and forcefully to get rid of Native Americans, Mexicans, and any Spaniards standing in their way.  Japan tried to assimilate and negotiate with China as well, but as they saw that it would be an impossible feat to simply “get rid of” all the Chinese, they acquired their claims in parts taking Manchuria in 1931 and Manchukuo in 1939.  Korea had been annexed earlier in 1910.  Methods may have differed between Japan and the United States, but the impetus for imperialism was the same. 

Persuasion

    The art of persuasion is a valuable tool, which, if controlled and mastered, could turn the collective minds of an entire people for or against a single idea or concept.  Its advertising in its purest form.  It is not so much what idea is presented than how it is presented that matters the most.  The number of war bonds sold depends on how well the advertisements were developed and how many people saw them.  It depends on who saw them, whether they were wealthy, upper-class or lower to middle class citizens who might not afford to invest in bonds but looked to perhaps gamble and cash in on the booming economy of the time.  How attractive were the armed forces made to look?  What kind of rewards, benefits or honors could be gained?  From the nationalistic stand point, how evil was the enemy made to look?  What facts about the enemy should be told or withheld from the public, and how can that information be skewed to make the enemy look even worse?  What rights had the enemy violated?  Was Japan a realistic threat to our liberty?  If they were, America was certainly not about to stand around and not take up arms.  America’s dignity had been challenged, and Japan would pay. 

    Conversely, how were America and the Allies violating Japan and other Asian nations? Asia had been invaded by an uninvited Western guest wearing the guise of diplomacy and trade.  They brought greed, wealth and sought not the benefit of the native people but for their own wealth.  They brought their Western ways spreading their culture, language, and ideologies, with empty hopes for Indians, Filipinos, Indonesians, and Chinese.  They brought materialism and selfishness.  India, China, the Philippines, and, with the exception of Thailand, Southeast Asia were oppressed under the ruling thumb of Western colonization.  Japan had the strongest Army and Navy in Asia.  Certainly it would be up to them to defend the honor and dignity of these Asian nations who could not fend for themselves.  America points their finger at Japan, the aggressor, while America itself has had a history of aggression against Blacks, and other minorities including Asians.  Japan brought wealth to Asia and stirred dormant countries like Korea to raise themselves up.  Asia had the potential to be a world power, and it could only do that with Japan’s leadership. 

    How well did each country play the race card?  Japan took no exception to whom they directed their racial slurs, but they painted a demonic image of the Allies much more than they did their Asian opposition.  They could not insult their own “brethren,” as they would put it, if they were to be won over to the Japanese side.  The United States, on the other hand, fixated on the dehumanized depiction of the Japanese, presenting them as monkeys and gorillas.  They tended to shy away from any animal or demonic portrayal of their European foes partly because the majority of American’s were of European decent.  To dehumanize the Europeans would be to dehumanize themselves.  They felt no ethnic ties to the Japanese whatsoever.  Both countries realized the importance of eliciting an ethnic hatred for the enemy as well as creating a subhuman image of them.  It is much easier to kill a big hairy white mongrel or vine-swinging, gun-wielding monkey than it is to kill another human being.  The enemy was not human. 

    It can easily be said that the United States had more effective propaganda because they won the war.  But the bottom line is that war is won on the battlefield.  The United States won because she swiftly and relentlessly bombed Tokyo and because she had the resources and means to do so.  With the major industrial areas of Japan bombed out of commission, the Japanese government could have shown war films on huge screens in every major town, posted propaganda posters on every street corner and newspaper, and handed out copies of Read This and the War is Won to every man, woman and child boosting morale and national pride, but Japan would have still lost the war.  Propaganda hoped to boosted morale, sold ideas, and gave hope and confidence to its audience.  It did not fight battles for them. 

    The affects of propaganda, however, last well after treaties are signed and the dusts of war settle. Japan, though defeated, still held inside the same hatred for the United States it had before the war if not more so.  They played the role of defeated foe, smiling to appease their victors on the outside but contemptuous and demoralized on the inside. The United States still often referred to the Japanese as “Japs” or other racially derogatory names.  The words and images left to us by propaganda remain in a nation's collective memory.  They are vestiges of war-time.  However good or bad, those memories linger in culture.  The elements of war are not left on the battle field to wither away with those who perished.  Hate, anger, and contempt are brought home so that “war” becomes no longer a job but a way of life.