Treatment of white people within a Japanese Empire that wins WW2?

In this scenario they took over a country or area with a large white population. Let’s ignore the unlikelihood of them winning the war this greatly for the sake of discussion. How would the Japanese Empire treat its white subjects? Would it vary on region or nationality? How would other nations especially European or white ones react to it if it was bad? If it’s a man in a high castle scenario I imagine many Nazis not liking even the idea of any Asian ruling over people in Australia, New Zealand, or especially the United States west coast considering many have German blood. I think any concept of “honorary aryans” goes out the window once the war is over and they aren’t useful anymore. And even if that idea stays they still aren’t probably considered the same as aryans by the Nazis. In a scenario where Nazis still lose and Japan still somehow gets Australia and New Zealand I imagine many in the United States and Europe will be very upset at them turning the place into a settler colony which probably leads to bad treatment of the local whites. Additional note, in the second scenario how does that change discussions and views of the concept of oppressed and oppressor people by some left wing people and groups later on when you now have a clear and recent example of whites experiencing colonization on the receiving end?
 

nbcman

Donor
OTL is a pretty good indicator - very badly. The Japanese had no compunctions in killing German civilians (missionaries) when they were co-belligerents / allied to Germany. So the Japanese in WW2 didn't really discriminate on what nation the white person was from when it came time to kill.
 
Australia (and maybe New Zealand) is the only place the Japanese could feasibly get to, in some utter, utter wank. Although the Japanese thought they could make a settler colony in those places, this doesn't seem very plausible, so probably they'd try a divide and conquer tactic and pit the Aboriginals and the Maori against the whites. Australia is the best place for this, since whites can be permanently expelled from certain areas to make way for Aboriginals under "proper" Japanese guidance. In NZ it might be hard to separate the whites from the Maori in any sensible way (not that the whole policy here is sensible to begin with).

Overall it just makes a Cold War in the Pacific, and a United States which is even worse in the treatment of American Indians and black people.
 
Australia (and maybe New Zealand) is the only place the Japanese could feasibly get to, in some utter, utter wank. Although the Japanese thought they could make a settler colony in those places, this doesn't seem very plausible, so probably they'd try a divide and conquer tactic and pit the Aboriginals and the Maori against the whites. Australia is the best place for this, since whites can be permanently expelled from certain areas to make way for Aboriginals under "proper" Japanese guidance. In NZ it might be hard to separate the whites from the Maori in any sensible way (not that the whole policy here is sensible to begin with).

Overall it just makes a Cold War in the Pacific, and a United States which is even worse in the treatment of American Indians and black people.
I would say America after ww2 and definitely after the 60s is a lot less brutal then the Japanese Empire. I rather be black man in the 50s in the United States then a woman in occupied China during the 30s. Japan also has a large population and high birth rate at the time. I could see them getting good numbers in Australia and New Zealand especially if they mainly focus on that and have less Japanese go to other Asian holdings. Northern and Eastern Australia being majority Japanese and them being a big minority in the south. New Zealand they could maybe become near 40 percent of the population. If a took the Western United States in some crazy way they can become big in numbers there too. Hawaii is already and still majority Asian. Alaska can become majority. Western Canada could become majority Japanese if they took that. British Columbia is around 30 percent Asian now isn’t it? Maybe Oregon and Washington. California they could get a large minority but maybe a majority if the state still becomes wealthy. California didn’t get a big population boom until after the war.
 
OTL is a pretty good indicator - very badly. The Japanese had no compunctions in killing German civilians (missionaries) when they were co-belligerents / allied to Germany. So the Japanese in WW2 didn't really discriminate on what nation the white person was from when it came time to kill.

When did this happen, the murder of German missionaries, I mean?
 
In The Man in the High Castle, the white people of the Pacific States are segregated from the Asian majority. In one episode, Joe Blake is shoved away from a taxi cab after a Japanese soldier shouts 'Japanese only!" Also, according to Resistance Radio, the Japanese despise their white subjects for the mere act of surrendering to them. They are seen as dishonourable cowards, not worthy of any rights.

I don't see any reason why the above would not play out in a world where the Japanese ruled a white-majority nation.
 
Australia (and maybe New Zealand) is the only place the Japanese could feasibly get to, in some utter, utter wank. Although the Japanese thought they could make a settler colony in those places, this doesn't seem very plausible, so probably they'd try a divide and conquer tactic and pit the Aboriginals and the Maori against the whites. Australia is the best place for this, since whites can be permanently expelled from certain areas to make way for Aboriginals under "proper" Japanese guidance. In NZ it might be hard to separate the whites from the Maori in any sensible way (not that the whole policy here is sensible to begin with).

Overall it just makes a Cold War in the Pacific, and a United States which is even worse in the treatment of American Indians and black people.

It seems to be a consensus in this forum, that, the Japanese could take Darwin but, that, it would be very hard for them to take more of Australia.
 
It seems to be a consensus in this forum, that, the Japanese could take Darwin but, that, it would be very hard for them to take more of Australia.

Very hard? Try impossible. To conquer Australia, you need to conquer ALL OF IT, including the Outback, which I very much doubt the Japanese could do, since they had zero experience in desert warfare. Take it from me, Australia is stinking hot in the worst of days. I doubt the Japanese could handle the extreme temperatures of the Outback.
 
In The Man in the High Castle, the white people of the Pacific States are segregated from the Asian majority. In one episode, Joe Blake is shoved away from a taxi cab after a Japanese soldier shouts 'Japanese only!" Also, according to Resistance Radio, the Japanese despise their white subjects for the mere act of surrendering to them. They are seen as dishonourable cowards, not worthy of any rights.

I don't see any reason why the above would not play out in a world where the Japanese ruled a white-majority nation.

On the other hand the pinocs described in the book serve the Japanese as collaborators in the Pacific States of America.
 
On the other hand the pinocs described in the book serve the Japanese as collaborators in the Pacific States of America.


True, but that doesn't negate my point. Just because they could have a white government doesn't mean they give the whites full rights. In a Japanese run nation, the whites will always be second-class citizens. Remember Childan in both the book and the show? In both versions, he acts subserviently towards the Japanese, so much so that he thinks he is on the same level as them.
 
Top