|
NeilPerry posted:I was wondering if they have any sort of presence in the media. Next to none and now that an Abe apologist is the next president of NHK you'll get none. 
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2013 09:32
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 12, 2024 04:52 |
|
|
Dr.Radical posted:Are you going to d-beat shows by any chance? No, just some places the guy from the Irregular Rhythm Asylum pointed out to me. I'm looking to get into the punk scene though, but I'm usually more into crust punk/sludge/screamo(the antifascist/vegan kind) scenes. That's part of the reason I'm looking into the anarchists. Also trying to find some animal rights activists but goddamn Japan seems way behind on that end.
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2013 10:33
|
|
|
Check out Earthdom in Shin-Okubo. Some crust/d-beat bands play and there are occasionally sludgy bands too. 20,000 Volts in Nishi-Koenji is also worth a look. It's kinda hard to know what the bands are like unless you know another band on the bill as a lot of different bands play at both places. I'd also suggest looking at the Boris website (if you're into sludgy stuff and you're in Japan I would assume you already know them)and the schedule because they play with a lot of different kinds of bands. Earthdom and 20,000 Volts are the venues I go to the most but a couple of others I've been to are Ikebukuro Chop, Nakano Moon Step, and Fever in the Shimokitazawa area. As far as political screamo bands, I really have no idea. I'm sure they exist as Tokyo has everything but outside of a flier for an Envy show at Shinjuku Loft, I haven't heard about any other screamo shows. Anyway, if you need a show pal, I'd be happy to go to shows with you or anyone else on Saturdays (after 8 or so)or Sundays or even Mondays. I'm really into any of that stuff and want to go to as many shows as possible.
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2013 10:59
|
|
|
And actually, come to think of it, you should go to or email Record Shop Base in Koenji. The people who run it have been in the hardcore scene forever, released Boris's first two albums, and have always been really helpful when I've asked about music recommendations or shows.
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2013 11:04
|
|
|
Well, this is a special editorial. Entitled "China and Britain won the war together" http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/10546442/Liu-Xiaoming-China-and-Britain-won-the-war-together.html quote:In the Harry Potter story, the dark wizard Voldemort dies hard because the seven horcruxes, which contain parts of his soul, have been destroyed. If militarism is like the haunting Voldemort of Japan, the Yasukuni Shrine in Tokyo is a kind of horcrux, representing the darkest parts of that nation’s soul. Ambassador Liu, reaching out to the people of the UK in the only way he knows how: by comparing Japan to the villain in a children's novel. The title also reminds me of all the places in China where you can find things like "中美英三国共同签署的《波茨坦公告》" "The Potsdam Declaration, which was signed by China, the United States, and Britain [IN THAT ORDER]" written everywhere hitension fucked around with this message at 13:11 on Jan 6, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2014 13:08
|
|
|
hitension posted:Well, this is a special editorial. Entitled "China and Britain won the war together" My wife was pretty grumpy he had to use a lame villain in his comparison. She figures they are at least as cool as Loki or The Joker. I didn't have the heart to tell her that they are maybe a Spiderman villain.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2014 16:18
|
|
|
If I was Turkey I'm not sure I would really want Japanese nuclear power plant technology, but what do I know.
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2014 19:43
|
|
|
Japan is generally really good at building poo poo that doesn't get totally ruined by earthquakes. Getting all dramatical over an old reactor that was supposed have been decommissioned 10 years previously getting damaged when it was hit by an earthquake stronger than what it was built to withstand isn't particularly useful to anybody. The take away from Fukushima Daiichi is not that Japanese nuclear technology is poor quality, but rather that TEPCO are bunch of fuckers and the government oversight and response was utterly inept. There have been zero fatalities resulting from radiation exposure, and there is pretty much universal agreement in scientific and public health circles worldwide that there is no statistically significant increase in risk for negative health effects as a result of exposure in the Fukushima Daiichi incident.
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2014 20:36
|
|
|
mystes posted:If I was Turkey I'm not sure I would really want Japanese nuclear power plant technology, but what do I know. Well Fukushima is a old GE plant, so yeah not really sure your getting the right message from this.
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2014 21:12
|
|
|
Maybe Abe should start by exporting Japanese nuclear technology to Japan then.
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2014 21:16
|
|
|
mystes posted:Maybe Abe should start by exporting Japanese nuclear technology to Japan then. Well to be honest TEPCO wanted to decommission the plant 15 years ago now, but weren't allowed to build the replacement so they had to keep it running (this is pretty much the main effect of anti-nuke movements).
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2014 03:17
|
|
|
Wibbleman posted:Well to be honest TEPCO wanted to decommission the plant 15 years ago now, but weren't allowed to build the replacement so they had to keep it running (this is pretty much the main effect of anti-nuke movements). I'm sure the TEPCO executives lost a lot of sleep over their paid off powerplant that kept making them money.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2014 13:40
|
|
|
Protocol 5 posted:There have been zero fatalities resulting from radiation exposure, and there is pretty much universal agreement in scientific and public health circles worldwide that there is no statistically significant increase in risk for negative health effects as a result of exposure in the Fukushima Daiichi incident. Well, except those US sailors that got a facefull of radioactive plume and are getting hit by cancer by the handfull. Just because people didn't have their skin melted off in a cartoonish fashion doesn't mean there won't be direct fatalities from the radiation. http://nypost.com/2013/12/22/70-navy-sailors-left-sickened-by-radiation-after-japan-rescue/ And that's far out at sea. I'm sure there are a ton of domestic cases but TEPCO loves covering poo poo up and the goverment loves helping them - oh look a convenient new secrecy bill too.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2014 15:22
|
|
|
Zo posted:Well, except those US sailors that got a facefull of radioactive plume and are getting hit by cancer by the handfull.  I believe this has been debunked as being made up last I checked, it was brought up in the energy generation thread.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2014 16:47
|
|
|
Nine of Eight posted:
The New York Post, running a badly fact-checked story? Next you're going to tell me Bat-Boy didn't run for president in '05!
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2014 02:12
|
|
|
Jonad posted:The New York Post, running a badly fact-checked story? Next you're going to tell me Bat-Boy didn't run for president in '05! He is the incumbent Governor of Florida, however.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2014 21:46
|
|
|
Zo posted:And that's far out at sea. I'm sure there are a ton of domestic cases but TEPCO loves covering poo poo up and the goverment loves helping them - oh look a convenient new secrecy bill too. As I said, TEPCO are fuckers and the government is inept. In spite of that, it appears that the long term impact will be minimal. The focus should be on the incompetence and complacency that lead to the reactor continuing operation a decade after it was supposed to have been decommissioned and the horribly mishandled response that is currently ongoing. A bunch of alarmist bullshit that exaggerates the impact of the incident helps precisely no one and only serves to distract from the humanitarian issue of the evacuees who have still not found permanent housing or employment and regulatory issues involving safety and response to incidents.
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2014 00:06
|
|
|
According to some guy on Twitter, Mac Akasaka (Smile Party) is running for governor of Tokyo again, after he said he had retired. This is the most important Japanese political news in months. His 2012 campaign video, for reference: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oH6zHNV8vOg Samurai Sanders fucked around with this message at 09:27 on Jan 14, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2014 09:23
|
|
|
Well, gee, I thought Abe visiting Yasukuni would make relations with China and Korea worse, but it's almost a moot point with this whole textbook thing. Edit: I guess it's just what he said he wanted 2 months ago so it's not a total surprise, but interesting timing at least. mystes fucked around with this message at 19:41 on Jan 17, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2014 19:15
|
|
|
You're talking about the change to refer to Senkaku and Dokdo as Japan's 'indigenous territories'? The former I can understand the logic for, but I was for some reason under the impression that the Japanese government was basically conceding Dokdo at this point.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2014 03:14
|
|
|
ozza posted:You're talking about the change to refer to Senkaku and Dokdo as Japan's 'indigenous territories'? The former I can understand the logic for, but I was for some reason under the impression that the Japanese government was basically conceding Dokdo at this point.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2014 04:30
|
|
|
I'd like to see Japan trade the Senkakus to Russia for those four islands off Hokkaido. Kills two birds with one stone, and would drive China up the wall!
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2014 09:37
|
|
|
That won't work because Japan is the only country that actually believes (or sets their official stance as) "there is no dispute". It's pretty funny and basically the political equivalent of covering your eyes to make the scary thing disappear.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2014 09:53
|
|
|
Zo posted:That won't work because Japan is the only country that actually believes (or sets their official stance as) "there is no dispute". It's pretty funny and basically the political equivalent of covering your eyes to make the scary thing disappear. It's exactly the same as South Korea's stance on Dokdo/Takeshima
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2014 11:13
|
|
|
Mr. Fix It posted:It's exactly the same as South Korea's stance on Dokdo/Takeshima Well I never said Japan's the only dumb country in general. Edit: also don't koreans actually live on the dokdos? Getting off topic though. Zo fucked around with this message at 11:23 on Jan 21, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2014 11:19
|
|
|
As far as I know it's a pretty typical stance when the territory is under your de facto control. It's the strongest possible assertion of your claim to it.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2014 11:23
|
|
|
Zo posted:Well I never said Japan's the only dumb country in general. Not really. There is a coast guard station there as a fig leaf and to massively pollute the water.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2014 11:26
|
|
|
Peel posted:As far as I know it's a pretty typical stance when the territory is under your de facto control. It's the strongest possible assertion of your claim to it. That may be true, but how many other countries agree that there is no diaoyu/senkaku dispute?
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2014 11:27
|
|
|
Few, but if saying something obviously false was dumb diplomacy every diplomat in the history of the world is an idiot.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2014 11:30
|
|
|
Zo posted:That won't work because Japan is the only country that actually believes (or sets their official stance as) "there is no dispute". It's pretty funny and basically the political equivalent of covering your eyes to make the scary thing disappear. Well it worked in Fukushima.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2014 12:13
|
|
|
Zo posted:That won't work because Japan is the only country that actually believes (or sets their official stance as) "there is no dispute". It's pretty funny and basically the political equivalent of covering your eyes to make the scary thing disappear. It's actually a pretty legitimate stance to take considering that there was no dispute up until the late 1960's/early 1970's, with official Chinese maps (by both Chinese governments, mind you) clearly showing the islands as Japanese, with their Japanese names. If China started claiming tomorrow that Hawai'i is, and always has been a part of China, don't you think that the best response the US could make would be to ignore their "claim"? That's what Japan is doing with the Senkaku Islands.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2014 16:06
|
|
|
Inu posted:It's actually a pretty legitimate stance to take considering that there was no dispute up until the late 1960's/early 1970's, with official Chinese maps (by both Chinese governments, mind you) clearly showing the islands as Japanese, with their Japanese names. If China started claiming tomorrow that Hawai'i is, and always has been a part of China, don't you think that the best response the US could make would be to ignore their "claim"? That's what Japan is doing with the Senkaku Islands. Of course the whole S-D dispute is for a thread on its own but dang you've sure been drinking a lot of japanese government koolaid if you actually believe what you wrote. Even a cursory wikipedia glance would have told you that the islands were under american control until the 70s, and china filed formal protests as soon as america ceded control to japan instead of china. Everybody had maps with every name and cherry picking maps is incredibly pointless. Comparing this to china randomly claiming hawaii just makes you look like one of those netuyo nutjobs (which you may be, I suppose).
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2014 16:17
|
|
|
This thread continues to be a wonderful reminder that Zo literally cannot make a post without sounding like a massive twat
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2014 16:33
|
|
|
I think I remember seeing a news story suggesting that Abe might be going to Sochi, and that he might meet and interact with other East Asian leaders while there. Is this a big deal? Does the PM of Japan not have regular face time with the leaders of SK and China? Obama meets with with his foreign counterparts pretty regularly, and that's my perception of what heads of state do, but maybe it's not the case with Japan. Have Abe and Xi ever met in person before? Another Japan news story (one that's getting a lot of coverage in the US) is the annual dolphin hunt, an instance of which was featured in the animal rights documentary The Cove. I've never seen the film- is the hunt really as cruel and inhumane as it is purportedly shown to be? If so, does anyone in the Diet care? I'd imagine not, but are animal rights interest groups even a factor in Japan?
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2014 17:44
|
|
|
I figured as long as it made Westerners angry but didn't really prompt any other government to take serious action, it was a perfect way to placate the right-wingers in Japan.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2014 17:48
|
|
|
LimburgLimbo posted:This thread continues to be a wonderful reminder that Zo literally cannot make a post without sounding like a massive twat Oh good, I was hoping it wasn't just me. Jesus. I.W.W. ATTITUDE posted:I think I remember seeing a news story suggesting that Abe might be going to Sochi, and that he might meet and interact with other East Asian leaders while there. Is this a big deal? Does the PM of Japan not have regular face time with the leaders of SK and China? Obama meets with with his foreign counterparts pretty regularly, and that's my perception of what heads of state do, but maybe it's not the case with Japan. Have Abe and Xi ever met in person before? I think they might have met like once last year but it wasn't for very long and they certainly weren't cordial. They've made big points of not meeting with each other at big forums like ASEAN and APEC and the like all as a way of underlining the dispute and the currently frosty nature of relations between the two countries. Same thing basically goes with South Korea; their new president is trying to build up an image of being a hardass towards Japan and trying to put Dokdo on the same level as Senkaku/Diaoyu (it's not). But because Korea hates Japan it scores her lots of easy political points telling Abe to gently caress himself. So if he goes to Sochi he probably won't meet either of them, no.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2014 18:21
|
|
|
Zo posted:Of course the whole S-D dispute is for a thread on its own but dang you've sure been drinking a lot of japanese government koolaid if you actually believe what you wrote. Even a cursory wikipedia glance would have told you that the islands were under american control until the 70s, and china filed formal protests as soon as america ceded control to japan instead of china. Everybody had maps with every name and cherry picking maps is incredibly pointless. Comparing this to china randomly claiming hawaii just makes you look like one of those netuyo nutjobs (which you may be, I suppose). You do realise that the whole issue is just a cover for an argument about who should control the Ryukyu islands, right? Or are you willing to say that China has a totally 100% valid claim to Okinawa too? (And how about the UK claiming Hawaii? They've got a far better claim to it than China has, and - if we're ignoring the right of possession, they have a better claim to Hawaii than the US does, just like Mexico and California/Texas. Oh and the UK/Canada to bits of the north of the US. What I'm trying to do here is demonstrate just how dumb what you are saying is, rather than actually suggest that we carve up the USA) Wait no - the UK has a better claim to France - the whole of it - than the UK does to the Senkaku Islands. Then there's other claims to other parts of it, French claims to parts of Germany, German claims to parts of France, Austrian claims to the north of Italy... Seriously, if you're relying claims that haven't been current since the 19th century, and even then were weak, you're pretty much taking the piss here. ookiimarukochan fucked around with this message at 19:38 on Jan 21, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2014 19:32
|
|
|
Zo posted:Of course the whole S-D dispute is for a thread on its own but dang you've sure been drinking a lot of japanese government koolaid if you actually believe what you wrote. Even a cursory wikipedia glance would have told you that the islands were under american control until the 70s, and china filed formal protests as soon as america ceded control to japan instead of china. Everybody had maps with every name and cherry picking maps is incredibly pointless. Comparing this to china randomly claiming hawaii just makes you look like one of those netuyo nutjobs (which you may be, I suppose). But none of the Chinese claims actually matter in terms of working out sovereignty. The ICJ has and will continue to ignore historical discovery claims (otherwise Italy, or Greece could claim the entire med basin, and Iran/Turkey etc could claim the boundaries of the Ottoman empire), in preference to who has been exercising sovereignty on the islands (precident/reference Island of Palmas Case). In this case the Ming empire onwards never had effective control, and never exercised sovereignty on the islands, and Japan has. This is why China is acting the way they are, continuing the "salami slice" tactic they have been using in the south china seas. There is only one document that might show china exercising sovereignty on the islands (the obtaining a special herb for the empress, that has largely been discredited as being fake even within china). Taiwan/Formosa's claim is a bit more complicated because they have been fishing there since at least 1915ish or so (prior to that is a bit of a contentious issue).
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2014 21:50
|
|
|
ookiimarukochan posted:You do realise that the whole issue is just a cover for an argument about who should control the Ryukyu islands, right? Wibbleman posted:But none of the Chinese claims actually matter in terms of working out sovereignty. The ICJ has and will continue to ignore historical discovery claims (otherwise Italy, or Greece could claim the entire med basin, and Iran/Turkey etc could claim the boundaries of the Ottoman empire), in preference to who has been exercising sovereignty on the islands (precident/reference Island of Palmas Case). In this case the Ming empire onwards never had effective control, and never exercised sovereignty on the islands, and Japan has. This is why China is acting the way they are, continuing the "salami slice" tactic they have been using in the south china seas. There is only one document that might show china exercising sovereignty on the islands (the obtaining a special herb for the empress, that has largely been discredited as being fake even within china). Taiwan/Formosa's claim is a bit more complicated because they have been fishing there since at least 1915ish or so (prior to that is a bit of a contentious issue). So what part of this is like china claiming hawaii? I don't recall actually arguing whose claim is better.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2014 02:01
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 12, 2024 04:52 |
|
|
Zo posted:So what part of this is like china claiming hawaii? I don't recall actually arguing whose claim is better.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2014 03:35
|
|