Is there a way to get a Anti-American Japan?

Oh, what would Dragon Ball Z be affected in this alternate timeline along with Nintendo games like Mario?
Shrug. Japanese are capitalists at heart just like any other civilization. Given a market of American "anime-boys" as consumers; they will sell them the dream for hard currency. Not in my Bugs Bunny pilot-house at all, but each human being is entitled to what he likes so long as it falls within international and domestic law.

Does that come anywhere close to answering your question?
 
Shrug. Japanese are capitalists at heart just like any other civilization. Given a market of American "anime-boys" as consumers; they will sell them the dream for hard currency. Not in my Bugs Bunny pilot-house at all, but each human being is entitled to what he likes so long as it falls within international and domestic law.

Does that come anywhere close to answering your question?
so that's it?
 
Operation OLYMPIC goes ahead, and fails; we get a conditional surrender of Japan in which they avoid occupation and retain Formosa as well as the Kuriles. The Militarists as such remain in control and follow a China style development for Empire and, just as they did IOTL, by the 1960s Japan is able to stand on its own, having the same level of steel output and merchant tonnage as the U.S. and thus having no need for them beyond being trade partners. Again, a clear China parallel.
 
we get a conditional surrender of Japan in which they avoid occupation and retain Formosa as well as the Kuriles.
This seems unlikely, as Olympic was planned for November, iirc, by which point the Kuriles had already been taken by the Soviets. Dunno why anyone would give those back, even if somehow both Olympic fails and the US doesn't just blockade or nuke Japan into submission afterwards.

The Militarists as such remain in control and follow a China style development for Empire and, just as they did IOTL, by the 1960s Japan is able to stand on its own, having the same level of steel output and merchant tonnage as the U.S. and thus having no need for them beyond being trade partners. Again, a clear China parallel.
China had far more resources than Japan, and, later on, had far more trading partners. I really don't see how Japan suddenly becomes China, given that it will be in an utterly abysmal state by 1945 and would be getting neither foreign aid nor have any real partners in rebuilding. Especially when this is apparently meant to be an anti-American Japan, who could they even be trading with in the postwar world? Certainly, there's very little reason for anyone to suddenly hop into bed with this Japan when it's being ruled by a government that was as insane as the militarists. For that matter, I'm not sure how that particular group, of all people, suddenly became candidates for overseeing an economic miracle that defies all belief,
 
Last edited:
This seems unlikely, as Olympic was planned for September, by which point the Kuriles had already been taken by the Soviets. Dunno why anyone would give those back, even if somehow both Olympic fails and the US doesn't just blockade or nuke Japan into submission afterwards.
Soviets only took the Kuriles by September because the Japanese had surrendered in August. At the time of the surrender, they had only landed on a single island and were getting shredded to pieces.

China had far more resources than Japan, and, later on, had far more trading partners. I really don't see how Japan suddenly becomes China, given that it will be in an utterly abysmal state by 1945 and would be getting neither foreign aid nor have any real partners in rebuilding. Especially when this is apparently meant to be an anti-American Japan, who could they even be trading with in the postwar world? Certainly, there's very little reason for anyone to suddenly hop into bed with this Japan when it's being ruled by a government that was as insane as the militarists. For that matter, I'm not sure how that particular group, of all people, suddenly became candidates for overseeing an economic miracle that defies all belief,
China in that it retains its authoritarian controls but a more mixed/capitalistic economy. Ironically, the situation I described is largely OTL; Japan by the 1960s was producing more steel and merchant/shipping tonnage than the United States, a drastic difference compared to the 1940s. Who would do business with them, you might say? See Francoist Spain for a contemporary example:

The biggest success was the acquisition of needed capital. The end of autarky brought in roughly $8 billion worth of foreign direct investment. Increased tourism, twenty million visitors came to Spain, and remittances from abroad supplied funds for needed capital goods. The new policies and flood of money into Spain from abroad fueled a fifteen-year growth in the economy, from $12 billion to $76 billion, that was surpassed only by Japan. The economic transformation was so powerful that some thought it gave fascism a new lease on life. In an October 7, 1968 editorial entitled “Fascism for the Future,” the American historian Gabriel Jackson speculated that fascism would outlive Franco. As he wrote, “a Fraquist type of dictatorship may continue for decades in Spain and by doing so may provide a model for other nations that achieve a minimum of economic prosperity in the absence of strong traditions of political liberty.”​
 
Ironically, the situation I described is largely OTL; Japan by the 1960s was producing more steel and merchant/shipping tonnage than the United States, a drastic difference compared to the 1940s.
I am aware of OTL Japan's economic recovery, but those have no real bearing on this Japan because the circumstances are wildly different. OTL Japan was actively rebuilt and reformed during the occupation, which for obvious reasons isn't happening here. More importantly, OTL Japan enjoyed links with the United States, and its rather unlikely that Japan-US relations play out in the same manner, if not because the same WW2 government is still ruling, then because this scenario pretty specifically calls for an anti-American Japan, which OTL Japan was not.

Who would do business with them, you might say? See Francoist Spain for a contemporary example:
Couple of small problems with comparing to Francoist Spain: Spain largely aligned with the US and managed to shape itself into a strategic ally, whereas this Japan, by definition cannot. Spain also did not bomb Pearl Harbor while merrily trying to murder everyone in the Pacific Rim, before retaining the same government that attempted such. And even postwar Spain was not in quite the nightmarish straits that Japan of 1945 was. So again, who is going to trade with this Japan? Not the Americans, clearly, and there's not all that many viable alternatives after that. What can an island of starving, bombed out ruins even offer that can't be gotten from anyone less certifiably mad? And in what world are the militarists who led Japan through an absolutely insane war the sort of people who can oversee what is, again, a recovery that defies all belief?
 
A very different Pacific War with a very different US at the other end; rvbomally's AAPA has a non-racist, but religiously and culturally supremacist US fight against Japan, depose the Emperor and attempt to turn the place into a settler colony
 
I am aware of OTL Japan's economic recovery, but those have no real bearing on this Japan because the circumstances are wildly different. OTL Japan was actively rebuilt and reformed during the occupation, which for obvious reasons isn't happening here. More importantly, OTL Japan enjoyed links with the United States, and its rather unlikely that Japan-US relations play out in the same manner, if not because the same WW2 government is still ruling, then because this scenario pretty specifically calls for an anti-American Japan, which OTL Japan was not.
Between 1929 and 1941, the Japanese were already posting impressively high and expansive rates of industrial growth, so I see no reason why the lack of an occupation would prevent that. As for the U.S. they were still Japan's biggest trading partner in 1941 and vice versa in terms of Asian trade. Hell, as late as 1940, U.S. oil companies were still vying for contracts in Manchuria.

Couple of small problems with comparing to Francoist Spain: Spain largely aligned with the US and managed to shape itself into a strategic ally, whereas this Japan, by definition cannot. Spain also did not bomb Pearl Harbor while merrily trying to murder everyone in the Pacific Rim, before retaining the same government that attempted such. And even postwar Spain was not in quite the nightmarish straits that Japan of 1945 was. So again, who is going to trade with this Japan? Not the Americans, clearly, and there's not all that many viable alternatives after that. What can an island of starving, bombed out ruins even offer that can't be gotten from anyone less certifiably mad? And in what world are the militarists who led Japan through an absolutely insane war the sort of people who can oversee what is, again, a recovery that defies all belief?
Francoist Spain, along with many other characters such as Apartheid South Africa, showed the U.S. was more than willing to work with the sorts that made up the militarists. You cite the past war as an impediment to relations, but the obvious counter to that is Communist China, which the U.S. was more than willing to play ball with economically and still does even to this day.
 
The US built a number of "pumpkin" bombs, which were the same dimensions and weight as the Fat Man atomic bomb, but filled with high explosive. 49 were dropped on Japan by the 509th Group (the Silverplate B-29s) as practice for the atomic-bomb missions. One pilot (without authorization) tried to drop a "pumpkin" on the Imperial Palace in Tokyo.

(My "source" for this is a vaguely remembered Reader's Digest article from at least 40 years ago; it was titled "<so-and-so>'s Pumpkin Raid on Hirohito".)

The bomb missed. WI if it hit? A "pumpkin" contained 2.9 tonnes of HE; it would do considerable damage, and quite possibly kill Hirohito.

In which case, it probably becomes impossible for Japan to surrender. The hard-liners in the Japanese high command would demand revenge for the death of the Emperor, This might include the murder of all Allied PoWs, the murder of all interned Allied civilians, or even a general massacre of anyone in Japanese-occupied territory. Japanese reprisals against Chinese civilians for the Doolittle raid (because the raiders crash-landed there and escaped overland) approached 250,000 deaths. The death of the sacred Emperor would call for slaughter many times greater (IMO).

After that, the Allied war against Japan would become a war of extermination. The surviving Japanese, if any, would not like Americans much.
 

Ulyanovsk

Donor
Between 1929 and 1941, the Japanese were already posting impressively high and expansive rates of industrial growth, so I see no reason why the lack of an occupation would prevent that. As for the U.S. they were still Japan's biggest trading partner in 1941 and vice versa in terms of Asian trade. Hell, as late as 1940, U.S. oil companies were still vying for contracts in Manchuria.
Yes, but again this has no bearing on the discussion because the circumstances are entirely different. We now have a ruined Japan that has been thoroughly devastated by war and likely bombed to pieces, and now it's arising in a world where there's the Communists in one side and the American bloc on the other - neither of which it is likely to be too friendly with.. As you state, in the period you're citing Japan still has an empire and resources like Manchurian oil to exploit and so punched above its size economically. Japan IOTL has an economic miracle but a large part of that hinged on heavy American investment in the post war period and the subsequent special trading relationship the two have had. Pointing to the Francoists, yes I agree there's precedence for America cooperating with militarists, but the PoD is explicitly stipulating a Japan that is Anti-American in policy and rhetoric.. The militarists America chose to deal with were almost always compatible with American aims against international communism and it did not find itself having special economic ties to countries that continued strong Anti-American rhetoric. You can cite China as an example, but that's obfuscating the very obvious: the rapprochement between the two countries with Nixon's visit and China's interest in forming bonds outside of the Comintern, not to mention the diplomatic and economic revolutions under Deng Xiaoping that explicitly sought a strong relationship with the United States. Anti-American posturing became less and less prominent and economic ties were cultivated, it's only resurfacing with more nationalistic currents attached to Xi Jinping because China can stand on its own two feat and can be called something of a superpower in its own right.

A strong economic relationship with a Japan in this timeline is possible, the problem is that it goes against the point of the thread though: that Japan won't be very anti-American while importing their goods and openly fostering a strong economic bond with them...
 
Last edited:
A strong economic relationship with a Japan in this timeline is possible, the problem is that it goes against the point of the thread though: that Japan won't be very anti-American while importing their goods and openly fostering a strong economic bond with them...
As say before, an anti americn japan don't have to be rich, just anti american
 
Yes, but again this has no bearing on the discussion because the circumstances are entirely different. We now have a ruined Japan that has been thoroughly devastated by war and likely bombed to pieces, and now it's arising in a world where there's the Communists in one side and the American bloc on the other - neither of which it is likely to be too friendly with.. As you state, in the period you're citing Japan still has an empire and resources like Manchurian oil to exploit and so punched above its size economically. Japan IOTL has an economic miracle but a large part of that hinged on heavy American investment in the post war period and the subsequent special trading relationship the two have had. Pointing to the Francoists, yes I agree there's precedence for America cooperating with militarists, but the PoD is explicitly stipulating a Japan that is Anti-American in policy and rhetoric.. The militarists America chose to deal with were almost always compatible with American aims against international communism and it did not find itself having special economic ties to countries that continued strong Anti-American rhetoric. You can cite China as an example, but that's obfuscating the very obvious: the rapprochement between the two countries with Nixon's visit and China's interest in forming bonds outside of the Comintern, not to mention the diplomatic and economic revolutions under Deng Xiaoping that explicitly sought a strong relationship with the United States. Anti-American posturing became less and less prominent and economic ties were cultivated, it's only resurfacing with more nationalistic currents attached to Xi Jinping because China can stand on its own two feat and can be called something of a superpower in its own right.

A strong economic relationship with a Japan in this timeline is possible, the problem is that it goes against the point of the thread though: that Japan won't be very anti-American while importing their goods and openly fostering a strong economic bond with them...
As I already pointed out, Japan was the main American trading partner in Asia in 1941 and the U.S. was the overall main trading partner of Japan. We all know how the rest of that year went...
 
Top