Funny Political Picture Thread

[rogue06]

Fun facts with Squidward is a little light on its facts.
Late 1800s American "advisors" required that Samurai be disbanded. The civil war did not result from the edict - the two factions were divided basically along the lines of "Kick the southern barbarians (南蛮) out now and hang the cost" against "learn the art of war from the southern barbarians, gain sufficient modern weaponry - then kick them out when we've got a chance of winning."
The second point for disarming Japanese citizens (and destroying katana, some centuries old, and banning production of new katana) came with the end of World War II - again as a requirement by America.
The common citizens never had the right to bear arms though - that was a right reserved for certain classes only. At least until the Taishou era (or maybe even the end of WWII (halfway through the Shouwa era) - I'm not really sure), peasants weren't even allowed to have surnames

For the sarcastically impaired the following is said in jest

I watched a movie, The Last Samurai, and now know all I'll ever need to know.

More seriously, FWIU the Haito Edict about a decade after the start of the Meiji period has been viewed by Japanese historians as not much different than the line of very similar acts taken throughout Japanese history (most recently, at the start of the Tokugawa shogunate (a.k.a., Edo period) that proceeded the Meiji) and I'm not sure what part the U.S. had to play in it considering one of the purposes of the Meiji reforms were to strengthen Japan against the sort of thing that were taking place in China -- colonization.

[tabibito]

For the sarcastically impaired the following is said in jest

I watched a movie, The Last Samurai, and now know all I'll ever need to know.

"The Last Samurai" got a fair bit of its history right, albeit with a decidedly pro-Japanese slant. I don't recall any mention of disarming the general citizenry though. To the best of my knowledge, Japan followed the usual patterns of feudal society - including restrictions on travel by peasants and the opportunity to bear arms.

More seriously, FWIU the Haito Edict about a decade after the start of the Meiji period has been viewed by Japanese historians as not much different than the line of very similar acts taken throughout Japanese history (most recently, at the start of the Tokugawa shogunate (a.k.a., Edo period) that proceeded the Meiji) and I'm not sure what part the U.S. had to play in it considering one of the purposes of the Meiji reforms were to strengthen Japan against the sort of thing that were taking place in China -- colonization.

You might have seen a film set in the prohibition era where bagmen walked into a shop and offered insurance to the owner - and then proceeded to destroy the stock to demonstrate the kind of things that the owner would be insured against.

America's bagmen arrived in the mid 1860s - basically saying "Do what we want or we'll obliterate your coastal towns, starting with Yokohama." The Meiji era began a couple of years later, with (or perhaps concurrent with) the arrival of American "advisors" in 1868. The Haito edict was issued in the 1870's - at the behest of the American "advisors."

ETA - just as a BTW. The Samurai were officially disbanded with the Haito Edict, which seems to have been the start of Bakumatsu, but there were still active Samurai until the end of WWII. Their actual disbandment occurred with a mass Seppuku in front of the Imperial Palace. Those who didn't die then laid down their arms.

[rogue06]

"The Last Samurai" got a fair bit of its history right, albeit with a decidedly pro-Japanese slant. I don't recall any mention of disarming the general citizenry though. To the best of my knowledge, Japan followed the usual patterns of feudal society - including restrictions on travel by peasants and the opportunity to bear arms.



You might have seen a film set in the prohibition era where bagmen walked into a shop and offered insurance to the owner - and then proceeded to destroy the stock to demonstrate the kind of things that the owner would be insured against.

America's bagmen arrived in the mid 1860s - basically saying "Do what we want or we'll obliterate your coastal towns, starting with Yokohama." The Meiji era began a couple of years later, with (or perhaps concurrent with) the arrival of American "advisors" in 1868. The Haito edict was issued in the 1870's - at the behest of the American "advisors."

ETA - just as a BTW. The Samurai were officially disbanded with the Haito Edict, which seems to have been the start of Bakumatsu, but there were still active Samurai until the end of WWII. Their actual disbandment occurred with a mass Seppuku in front of the Imperial Palace. Those who didn't die then laid down their arms.

1850s. Not mid 1860s.

I'm not sure why Americans would care whether or not the Japanese were again limiting swords to those who were permitted them (these measures were done to consolidate political power by making sure that weapons were in the hands of the ruling government and not available to potential dissenters). They weren't there to take over but make lots of money through trade.

Americans probably really didn't care whether Japan modernized or not (unless they could profit by the process of modernization).

The various laws were designed to strengthen Imperial control, reinforce the class system and to modernize -- all in order to allow Japan to resist foreign pressure and reduce foreign influence. So you'll have to explain why the Americans in Japan thought that doing this would be beneficial for them.

[tabibito]

1850s. Not mid 1860s.

I'm not sure why Americans would care whether or not the Japanese were again limiting swords to those who were permitted them (these measures were done to consolidate political power by making sure that weapons were in the hands of the ruling government and not available to potential dissenters). They weren't there to take over but make lots of money through trade.

Americans probably really didn't care whether Japan modernized or not (unless they could profit by the process of modernization).

The various laws were designed to strengthen Imperial control, reinforce the class system and to modernize -- all in order to allow Japan to resist foreign pressure and reduce foreign influence. So you'll have to explain why the Americans in Japan thought that doing this would be beneficial for them.

All designed to allow Japan to resist foreign foreign influence, yes. The unabridged histories don't paint as rosy a picture as the sanitised versions. (and yes - I had the date of Perry's little visit wrong.)

The more technologically advanced Japan became, the greater the market for American exports, making sure of course that America had a virtual monopoly on that trade, and a very lucrative imbalance of terms in America's favour. You might like to check into the actions taken by America to ensure that remained the case, culminating in 1941 with a declaration by Japan that there would be war if America did not lift embargoes on Japan's access to markets. The British Empire stated that if it came to war between Japan and America, America would have the empire as allies.

America was acting as a colonial power, and in the way that colonial powers always have done, including - you don't want the natives to be armed and having the option to make trouble. Even now, colonial or wanna-be colonial powers still act in the same ways ((eg Russia/Ukraine)).

All that said, Japanese people today are largely aware that the follow up to the horrendous losses of WWII leaves them a whole lot better off than they would have been without western interference.

[rogue06]

chris-wallace-leaving-foxnews-no-one-cares.jpg
Wallace has announced that he's moving to CNN. Ironically one of his biggest complaints
centers on his belief Fox's talking heads (particularly Hannity and Carlson) aren't honest.
And yet he picks CNN as his new home

CNN+ is a bust. Fewer than 10,000 daily users and with massive lay-offs and budget cuts looming.

Wallace would have been better off retiring and doing his own podcast. Probably have more viewers.

tweet-chris-wallace-having-daily-breakdowns-over-cnn-sucking-so-bad.jpg

chris-wallace-leave-cushy-job-cnn-shuts-down-30-days.jpg

It shouldn't come as a surprise that the same sort of programming that CNN has trouble giving away for free didn't find many folks willing to pay for it. Apparently the new owners referred to this joke as "CNN Minus." There are a bunch of things folks have noted have lasted longer than CNN+'s 23 days, and here are a few:

• Kamala Harris' presidential campaign: 202 days
• Marriage of Pamela Anderson and Kid Rock: 122 days
• New Coke: 79 days
• Falkland's War: 74 days
• Marriage of Kim Kardashian and Kris Humphries: 72 days
• Caveman: the sitcom inspired by the GEICO commercials: 42 days
• Tom Brady's retirement: 40 days
• Pope John Paul I's reign: 33 days
• Presidency of William Henry Harrison: 31 days
• Your New Years resolution:

At a tie there was Seattle's Autonomous Zone, which also lasted 23 days.

[rogue06]

278827826_683363359537902_5599610271507156992_n.jpg

[rogue06]

Hitting_the_Hive_Small20220423040000.jpg

[rogue06]

279080914_5712512615430061_9175287951197673967_n.jpg

[rogue06]

279158355_2177912665692690_1032120851451599765_n.jpg
Maybe why Disney is so against anti-grooming legislation.

[rogue06]

close-down-businesses-falsely-end-covid-reopen-call-record-job-growth.jpg
The left has been gaslighting everyone about how successful old Joe's policies have
been to the point that the public isn't buying their crap.

[rogue06]

278845027_10222049067157615_9109682250526654275_n.jpg

[rogue06]

2b30a340-cc39-4b16-864d-7ba7f5da7f00.jpg

[rogue06]

278713794_681429289731309_6850647063376817961_n.jpg

[rogue06]

279119019_5714686818545974_2020683893739090636_n.jpg

[rogue06]

gender-studies-in-the-80s-playboy.jpg