Why the emphasis on Hitler, but not on Tojo?

Question

We often hear WWII started when Hitler invaded Poland, or (for the U.S.) when the Japanese attacked Pearl Harbor. We fought against Hitler and against the Japanese.

But why is it personalized for Hitler, but not personalized for Hideki Tojo (or Tojo Hideki)? Hitler, personally, never set foot on Polish soil, but he was the leader. On the other hand, Tojo was the Japanese leader.

Why the difference in popular or media treatment of these two bad guys?

Answer 1

First of all, Tojo was hanged on December 23, 1948 after being sentenced to death for war crimes.

Second, he was responsible for many deaths (from Wikipedia)- “Because of the crimes committed under his authority, Tojo is often considered responsible for the murder of more than 8 million civilians in China, Korea, Philippines, Indochina, and in the other Pacific island nations, as well as the murder of tens of thousands of Allied POWs and for the approval of government-sanctioned biological tests on POW’s and Chinese civilians.” In many ways, he was everything Hitler was.

I think the query regards the different modern media treatment of the two figures, which is an interesting question. The answer, I think, lies in our own mostly European heritage, and the effect that has on general public perception. Generally stated, it is easier to understand the plight and suffering of those who “seem like you”. As most of the victims of Japanese aggression in World War II were Asian, the horrors inflicted on them do not seem as transferable.

Additionally, one cannot forget that many victims of German atrocities made their homes in the United States after the war. American Jewish groups have – rightfully – made a point of reminding the American public of Nazi crimes. There is no equivalent advocacy group for Japanese crimes in the US.

The treatment of Chinese civilians in World War II is still a point of great contention between China and Japan to this day, and Japanese politicians are regularly criticized by China for visiting Japanese war graves and memorials. So, while Tojo and other Japanese criminals of World War II may be little noticed in America, it is not so elsewhere.

Answer 2

1-Hitler invaded Poland (white), Holland (white and Protestant), Belgium (white), Norway (white and protestant), France (white) and bombed Britain (white, English speaking and protestant). Tojo invaded China (corrupt yellow heathen), French Indochina (full of yellow heathen and collaborationist French), the Dutch East Indies/Indonesia (brown Muslims), Burma and Thailand (brown Buddhists). See where I'm going with this? We were a very racist society at the time and what Hitler was doing was so much more against "the order of things" than Tojo. That's why he was worse then. It's something we try to forget now, but its implications are still dogging us.

2. Hitler enacted a complex bureaucracy and political police to systematicly round up the ethnically "unpure", put them on trains, and wipe all trace of them from the face of the earth in an elaborate industrialized operation. Tojo just let his troops run wild and act with stupid, animalistic brutality. The size of some Japanese atrocities can compete with some of the Nazis, but there was much more malicious intent and ultimately far greater bloodshed in Hitler's atrocities.

3. Hitler was Germany's second time as the bad guy in world war. Both Japan and Italy however had fought with the Allies the first time out. They were new at being the bad guy.

Answer 3

Excellent question. Especially because they were both brutally genocidal. I can only think of a couple of reasons:

1. Hitler was many things that personified the cruel, Orwellian police state. He was the founder of the uber-fascist National Socialist Party (Nazis), he took over Germany in a violent Putsch and created the brutal Gestapo and SA (which later became the SS). In addition, he was the military commander-in-chief (albeit a crazy, bad one), he is remembered in history as a megalomaniac, and he was the architect of the Holocaust. In contrast, Tojo was merely the commander of the Imperial Japanese Army (He had counterparts in the Imperial Navy: Yamamoto, Nagumo). Equally brutal yes, but compared to Hitler, he played a relatively smaller role in terms of shaping the country's path. The Emperor was still the figurehead leader of Japan.

2. There has been a much more successful awareness campaign waged on the details of the Holocaust than on the atrocities committed by the Japanese (such as the Bataan Death March and the rape of Nanking in which millions of Chinese civilians were slaughtered). Perhaps this is due to a Western-centric view. If you live in Western society or listen to Western media, of course the war in Europe would take center stage over the war in the Pacific (unless you knew someone who fought and died there). For Asians, it's probably the opposite.
Spielberg and others have successfully used the power of Hollywood to bring the Holocaust to light. Now I don't mean to imply anything remotely racist here. I'm simply saying that I wish there could be more balance and that other atrocities in the Pacific theater were just as heinous and just as deserving of media coverage or public attention. Especially if future generations are to avoid and learn from the mistakes of WWII.

Answer 4

I think it's simpler than the previous writer - Japan's war crimes took place a long way away from western opinion formers, and was documented in a script that most westeners cannot read. Also, most of the victims were - to be horribly blunt - not white, and therefore of little interest to the western public. We're not good at acknowledging the contribution and suffering of anyone other than the US and Europe. Look at how little credit is given to the massive sacrifice of the USSR.

In the UK, what little is known about Japanese war crimes relates to the terrible treatment meted out to white POWs.

I suspect that in the region where Japanese war crimes took place, notably China, Hitler is largely an irrelevance and the responsibility of Tojo and the Emperor is much more discussed.

Answer 5

Part of it was that Tojo did not even become Prime Minister of Japan until October 1941, well into Japan's war against China and others. Japan's war with them was more of a collaborative effort rather than what seemed to be a personal matter for Hitler. In actuality, the ire that the U.S. had for Japan was personified in Emperor Hirohito until it seemed that he wasn't as culpable in military decisions as the Japanese cabinet. In any case, he was no longer Prime Minister after 1944.

Tojo was a very aggressive leader, and under his leadership millions of civilians died as a result of Japanese combat operations. Also, many POW's were abused while he was in office. All of these constituted war crimes, but compared to Hitler, who ordered the deaths of millions that had nothing to do with the war, Tojo's crimes were mild in comparison.

Hope that helps.

Answer 6

Tojo did not gas over 10 million helpless prisoners (Jews and others) like Hitler. War is one thing. We were Tojo's enemies during the war. Things done during war against your enemy are one thing. But the wanton slaughter of unarmed civilians is another. It is for the holocaust, and not WW2, that Hitler is considered a monster.

Answer 7

Hitler was all about the killing of the jews, etc. Some think Hitler to be the most evil man who has ever lived.

Answer 8

they are equally culpable. that is a very thought provoking question. the son of a ***** should have been hanged.