The imprecise and discrepant numbers of casualties as well as the notions of presumably legitimate sources lead many hard liners in Japan to maintain that the Massacre could not have occurred. Fujioka Nobukatsu, a professor of education at the University of Tokyo and a leading revisionist in Japan, adamantly argues that atrocities against civilians numbered forty-seven, and that "200,000 civilians could not have possibly have been massacred unless ghosts were killed." The revisionists have not been held to only empty rhetoric, for in the 1980's there was a series of well-publicized trials regarding textbook alterations. The revisionists clamored for changes regarding the usage of the word "aggression", citing that it carried a negative ethical connotation, and opted for the word "advance", and reduced attention towards the Nanking Massacre in its totality or at the very least omitting the number of casualties. It must not be mistaken that such revisionists are fanatical fringe groups who desire to rewrite history, but rather make up a group with considerable political clout. Among the members of this group are prominent figures such as Fujio Masayuki, formerly a minister of education before being dismissed by the Prime Minister for statements regarding the Massacre as "just a part of war," and Ishihara Shintaro, a leading member of the Liberal Democratic Party in Japan. Shintaro has stated, "People say that the Japanese made a holocaust there (reference to Nanking), but that is not true. It is a story made up by the Chinese. It has tarnished the image of Japan, but it is a lie." The fight to edit textbooks has not stopped, as the ministry of education continues to screen textbooks for areas that it wishes to omit. Several cases appeared throughout the 1990s in which figures for casualties of the Massacre and wording were changed to provide for a more ambiguous meaning.

Combating against such revisionists are historians (labeled "progressives") who seek to educate the populace of the entire war legacy of Japan focusing on its entirety and accepting responsibility for actions undertaken by the Imperial government. The battle between the two groups became highly publicized through the Ienaga trials, which began in 1965 and continued in the 80's due to constant appeals. Historian Ienaga Saburo sued the government since the Ministry of Education had tampered with his textbook and altered the relevant areas involving the Nanking Massacre, downplaying its effects. The progressives have continued to denounce the ideas of the revisionists and have often braved physical harm, death threats, and assassination attempts from right wing nationalist groups in their attempts to promote public reconciliation with Japan's wartime legacy.

The controversial debate regarding the Nanking Massacre provides an intriguing question: how objective are the history texts that are read by students? Historical objectivity is often taken for granted; what we read, we often believe-as in this case, textbooks have lead to a fallacy or distortion of history. While cynicism often leads to questioning the validity of the "truth", the luxury of cynicism is often a hallmark of age, unavailable to the young. It is not inconceivable to consider that there are plenty of students in elementary, junior high, and high school who simply absorb what is taught from their history texts. After all, history occurs. An event is not theoretical; it is a realistic fact of nature that can be determined through evidence. However, the Nanking Massacre acts as an example of the very startling idea that history can in fact be denied and can be selectively erased. The work of the revisionists and right wing nationalists in Japan has undermined the goal of history, the minutest possibility of objectivity.

<~ prev | next ~>