Historical Revisionism

 

The Past is Unpredictable
   The author of the book pictured above wrote recently an "Opinion" piece about "The Myth of Mass Sexual Violence" referred to in the subtitle of his book which is due out in mid-June. It is not unusual for an author to write an article to call attention to a forthcoming book. It is somewhat different, however, when the article offers an indictment of the profession of history as now practiced, and the "myth makers" who may review it will not be happy. 
   My prediction, however, is that the author need not be worried since the book will likely not be reviewed. I have noticed recently that books presenting interpretations that run counter to current ones are largely ignored. It would be interesting to see scholarly reactions to the arguments made by Walsh, but there will probably not be many. One is left with the comments of those who read the article in the Washington Post and there are over 300 of them, which simply show how divided we are. 
   Given the lack of scholarly engagement between those on different ideological teams, I will offer some extracts from the piece by Walsh and some information about the book. At least you will learn about his interpretation which will be ignored rather than rebutted.

The Myth
   The title of the article sets the tone: "How an Outrageous Smear of U.S. Troops Wound Up in History Books: Remarkably, the Propaganda Has Come Into Academic Vogue on Both Sides of the Pacific," Brian P. Walsh, Washington Post, May 29, 2024. The tone continues:

  The enlightened self-interest of the United States toward its conquered foe was a source of pride to most Americans. But in a corner of Japanese society, sensationalist left-wing propagandists had already begun to paint a distorted and often invented picture of widespread atrocities by U.S. occupation forces, atrocities that bore a striking resemblance to Japan’s own wartime outrages. Remarkably, much of this propaganda has now been incorporated into mainstream academic literature on both sides of the Pacific. Otherwise dry and theory-sodden history texts, groaning from prestigious university presses, routinely amplify sloppy, biased and downright dishonest scholarship in a race to describe horrors that have no basis in primary sources….
  Thus, academic readers today are told that upon entering Japan, U.S. servicemen “engaged in an orgy of looting, sexual violence, and drunken brawling” and that during the first 10 days of the occupation, there were 1,336 reported cases of rape in Kanagawa Prefecture alone. Not true. They are told that American officers demanded that the Japanese government set up brothels for their troops and that after embarrassed officials in D.C. forced the brothels closed, GIs went on a rampage and that reported rapes of Japanese women skyrocketed from an average of 40 to 330 cases a day. But no one has found or produced those alleged reports.

 If one investigates primary sources instead of rehashed propaganda, quite a different story emerges....

Why, then, does a narrative that essentially inverts reality enjoy such currency? The politicization of academic history has become so severe in U.S. higher education that even relatively unbiased historians cannot avoid being influenced by the prevalent anti-American bias in the field. Worse, many academic historians have come to see this bias as a virtue rather than a flaw. One fashionable bias holds that the United States and especially its military are repressive and reactionary forces and thus incapable of bringing about any positive change in the world.

 

The Book

  The "Rape" of Japan... can be purchased from Amazon where this information is found:

  Brian P. Walsh, a Princeton-educated scholar, thoroughly debunks this false narrative in a brave and compelling book that reflects his in-depth research into both American and Japanese primary sources....
Walsh sets the records straight.... 

 The “Rape” of Japan is a long-overdue refutation and exposure of a relentless propaganda campaign that has persisted for more than seven decades. 

  More details are provided by the publisher, the U.S. Naval Institute Press, a fact that a hostile reviewer would seize upon. A link is provided, so you can assess the publisher at your leisure. Also found are reviewer comments provided by the USNIP and again, an unfriendly critic would note that some of the reviewers have military connections. It would be interesting to see these reviews and the book assessed in scholarly journals, but that probably will not happen.

“This deeply researched and carefully documented study conclusively refutes the myth of mass rape by American soldiers in occupied Japan after World War II.  Walsh shows that projection by Japanese men in a patriarchal society, anti-American propaganda by Japanese communists and socialists, and the image of rape as a metaphor for conquest and submission created a false memory of sexual predation that was in reality far less common among American occupation forces than the legend.”—James M. McPherson, George Henry Davis Professor of History Emeritus, Princeton University

"Seldom has a scholar displayed such courage in refuting an egregious falsehood so deeply implanted in accepted historiography. Brian Walsh systematically dismantles an error-filled absurd myth perpetrated by self-serving propagandists, which was then, as is too often the case, compounded in subsequent sloppy scholarship. Walsh backs up his argument every step of the way with rock-solid, previously ignored primary source documentation. For a historian, such fearless pursuit of the truth is a superpower. The “Rape” of Japan should be required reading for students at every level and anyone who appreciates historical accuracy."—Ann Todd, Ph.D, Historian

"This striking original study of the American occupation of Japan refutes the general depiction of American troops as violent assailants of Japanese women.  Deep research and penetrating analysis, including broad use of Japanese sources, easily destroys the widespread myths of mass rapes spread by Japanese communist propaganda."—Dr. Stanley L. Falk, Former Chief Historian, USAF       

“The legend that American commanders orchestrated the mass rape of Japanese women by U.S. service members during the occupation of Japan inverts the axiom that the victors write the history. With meticulous excavation of original source material and an epic demolition of the construction and spread of this mythology, Brian Walsh exposes not only this mendacious narrative, but also provides a timeless warning of how too many historians suspended their critical facilities.”—Richard B. Frank, military historian and author of Tower of Skulls: A History of the Asia-Pacific War: July 1937-May 1942

“Over many years, it has been widely and persistently reported that American servicemen in the armed forces occupying Japan after World War II engaged in an orgy of sexual violence against Japanese girls and women. In The ‘Rape’ of Japan, historian Brian Walsh demolishes this myth. By carefully and thoroughly examining Japanese and American records, he exposes a lie born of shame, revenge, and sloppy scholarship. Walsh writes clearly and convincingly. The ‘Rape’ of Japan is a tour de force of debunking—and a compelling story of how and why lurid myths can take hold.”—Evan Thomas, author of Road to Surrender: Three Men and the Countdown to the End of World War II.

This striking original study of the American occupation of Japan refutes the general depiction of American troops as violent assailants of Japanese women. Deep research and penetrating analysis, including broad use of Japanese sources, easily destroys the widespread myths of mass rapes spread by Japanese communist propaganda. —Dr. Stanley L. Falk, Former Chief Historian, U.S. Air Force

   It is the author's indictment that interests me and its strident tone is found also in some of the reviewer comments directly above. One hopes that those indicted will respond in a manner that will help us learn more about current historiographic standards. 

Hydration: Going Against the Current

 

  The cartoon above arrived today, courtesy of the New Yorker.  That fact, plus the fact that it is pouring outside, reminded me of a "FAD" which I have wondered about over a number of years. It has to do with the consumption of water. The need for humans to drink huge amounts of it; people doing little physical work at all in comfortable, climate controlled buildings. I recall going to meetings where the participants looked like they were heading off on a safari. To ascend to the second floor, elevator buttons had to be pushed for those carrying  enough water bottles to get them through the hour.  Had I been as smart then as I now am, I surely could have convinced the folks at "The Bay" to start selling colourful canteens to match the work gear.

   It is lucky for me that the answer to the question, "How Much Water Do You Actually Need?" arrived just prior to that cartoon.  The answer to the question is basically, "Not Much." Here is the recent article, as well as another one which determines that this whole myth began in 1945. You should look at the articles and additional literature since I am not providing all the stuff about electrolytes. Still, you are more likely to be waterlogged than dehydrated.

"How Much Water Do You Actually Need? Here’s how to know when you truly need to hydrate," Christie Aschwanden, New York Times, September 17, 2021. 

If you’ve spent any time on social media or visited an athletic event lately, you’ve surely been bombarded with encouragements to drink more water. Celebrity influencers lug around gallon-sized water bottles as the hot new accessory.... 
The purported benefits of excess water consumption are seemingly endless, from improved memory and mental health to increased energy to better complexion. “Stay hydrated” has become a new version of the old salutation, “Stay well.”...

We’ve all been taught that eight 8-ounce glasses of water per day is the magic number for everyone, but that notion is a myth, said Tamara Hew-Butler, an exercise and sports scientist at Wayne State University.

….Do I have to drink water to stay hydrated?

Not necessarily. From a purely nutritional standpoint, water is a better choice than less healthy options like sugary sodas or fruit juices. But when it comes to hydration, any beverage can add water to your system, Dr. Hew-Butler said.... One popular notion is that drinking beverages with caffeine or alcohol will dehydrate you, but if that’s true, the effect is negligible, Dr. Topf said. A 2016 randomized controlled trial of 72 men, for instance, concluded that the hydrating effects of water, lager, coffee and tea were nearly identical....
You can also get water from what you eat. Fluid-rich foods and meals like fruits, vegetables, soups and sauces all contribute to water intake. Additionally, the chemical process of metabolizing food produces water as a byproduct, which adds to your intake too, Dr. Topf said....
But drinking more water, even when I’m not thirsty, will improve my health, right?No. Of course, people with certain conditions, like kidney stones or the more rare autosomal dominant polycystic kidney disease, may benefit from making an effort to drink a little more water than their thirst would tell them to, Dr. Topf said.
But in reality, most healthy people who blame feeling ill on being dehydrated may actually be feeling off because they’re drinking too much water....

The Source of the Myth

"No, You Do Not Have to Drink 8 Glasses of Water a Day," Aaron Carroll, New York Times, Aug. 24, 2015

If there is one health myth that will not die, it is this: You should drink eight glasses of water a day.

It’s just not true. There is no science behind it.

I was a co-author of a paper back in 2007 in the BMJ on medical myths. The first myth was that people should drink at least eight 8-ounce glasses of water a day. This paper got more media attention (even in The Times) than pretty much any other research I’ve ever done.

It made no difference. When, two years later, we published a book on medical myths that once again debunked the idea that we need eight glasses of water a day, I thought it would persuade people to stop worrying. I was wrong again.

Many people believe that the source of this myth was a 1945 Food and Nutrition Board recommendation that said people need about 2.5 liters of water a day. But they ignored the sentence that followed closely behind. It read, “Most of this quantity is contained in prepared foods.”....

Water is present in fruits and vegetables. It’s in juice, it’s in beer, it’s even in tea and coffee. Before anyone writes me to tell me that coffee is going to dehydrate you, research shows that’s not true either.

Although I recommended water as the best beverage to consume, it’s certainly not your only source of hydration. You don’t have to consume all the water you need through drinks. You also don’t need to worry so much about never feeling thirsty. The human body is finely tuned to signal you to drink long before you are actually dehydrated.

Contrary to many stories you may hear, there’s no real scientific proof that, for otherwise healthy people, drinking extra water has any health benefits. For instance, reviews have failed to find that there’s any evidence that drinking more water keeps skin hydrated and makes it look healthier or wrinkle free. 

A Bonus Source:

This Question and Answer article is from the University of Virginia. Here is a sample. You can read the complete article by clicking on this link:

EVERYTHING WE THINK WE KNOW ABOUT DRINKING WATER MAY BE WRONG,

January 27, 2020 UVA. 

Perhaps, more important than the conflicting scientific evidence is the strong marketing effect for sports beverages and bottled water that began in the 1990s, along with a recommendation from the American College of Sports Medicine in 1996 that focused on higher fluid intakes and drinking as much as tolerated. This recommendation also popularized the claim that you should drink before exercise and stay ahead of dehydration. The marketing efforts have been highly effective and I think are likely the greatest contributor to current behaviors. 

Q. Is there a recommended amount of water that a person should drink on a daily basis? Do how much you weigh and your overall level of physical activity play into it?

A. I am always hesitant to give a specific amount of fluid intake that is “right” for someone.  There are so many variables involved, such as your activity level, fitness, ambient temperature and sweat rate, that blanket recommendations don’t make much sense.

More important, we should recognize that dehydration is not a disease. If you are exercising or doing other daily activities and you are not drinking then, at some point, you get thirsty. Thirst is our bodies’ way of telling you to drink. Thirst has evolved in the animal kingdom over millions of years and is a very effective way to prevent dehydration.

The notion that you should drink to prevent thirst makes no sense. Humans don’t need to be told when and how much to drink (except in rare medical circumstances). Thirst is our innate hydration sensor.

The End.