Talk:Hideki Tojo

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment[edit]

This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Peer reviewers: Kyle's oranges.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 23:25, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

I've marked the entire section on Australia for cleanup. I'd copyedit the thing if I had any idea what it was trying to say. Seriously, guys, I know machines that can write more comprehensibly than that. --Nicholas Tam 12:21, 6 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I've had a go at editing this paragraph. I'm not sure of the history but at least it's readable.PaulWay 22:43, 29 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I think this whole article could use a serious cleanup (and have marked it). There's good info here, but the language reads like a not-quite perfect translation, and a lot of the facts need more detail -- don't have time to find them all, but one example is the line "In those days, the Japanese army was strongly pushing to begin the war because Germany was winning." What dates? Who was pushing? Why? Why did Tojo care? There's a lot of lines all over the article that have similar problems.

I do think the lead is quite good as is, but I wasn't quite sure how to mark everything expect that. -- Fang2415 12:35, 6 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'd like to see more info about what those war crimes were. Also add some information on the Baatan Death March, and the treatment of people in the Phillipines after the Japanese invasions,

What is his right-wing grand daughters name? --Reagle 23:52, 9 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Her name is Yuko Tojo (Yūko Tōjō), and she ran for the Diet in 2007 on a platform of defending Japan's wartime record. 69.181.82.221 22:34, 22 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Why is Tojo in English order?[edit]

Because he was a World War II figure, Tojo is best known in English order. (The English version of Mainichi Shimbun uses English order [1]) WhisperToMe 03:18, 15 Sep 2004 (UTC)

"6,300" for "Hideki Tojo" "1,860" for "Tojo Hideki" WhisperToMe 03:21, 15 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Japanese names are generally rendered in Western style when used in an English-language text, and that is the way it is also done on Wikipedia. For example: Isoroku Yamamoto and Ichiro Suzuki are also listed here as given name followed by family name. Jsc1973 (talk) 15:27, 25 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It is not "also done" on Wikipedia in this way, and I could cite several pages to prove it, but I suppose consistency only means what the Wikipedia cabal wants. Ataru (talk) 14:58, 6 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

27th Prime Minister of Japan?[edit]

Surely Tojo can't be the 27th Prime Minister of Japan? On the relevant articles his predecessor Fumimaro Konoe was said to be the 38th and 39th while his successor Kuniaki Koiso was said to be the 41st.

Looks like someone used the wrong kind of list. Japanese PMs are listed in number of terms, unlike, say, US President which is listed in number of people, which is why Fumimaro can be both 38th and 39th; However, Tojo was the 27th PERSON to be PM. I've changed it. --Golbez 18:29, July 30, 2005 (UTC)

Why Tojo became the prime minister?[edit]

"Why Tojo became the prime minister?" Seems like an odd thing to have as a subtitle. I think at least the question mark at the end should be removed, unless there is something I'm missing.

I've changed it to "Rise to prime ministership", which is a bit clumsy but is at least good English. Saforrest 16:55, 17 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Meaning?[edit]

Any guesses on what this is trying to say?

He was also the real commander-in-chief at charge of Japanese Secret Services before and Pacific War period in direct link with Koki Hirota why leading secret services in Black Dragon Society and others Japanese secret societies.

Saforrest 16:55, 17 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

This meaining preciselly,why Hideki Tojo poses direct command over Japanese Secret Services,since your period of Commander in Kempeitai Forces in Manchukuo(also leading Manchukuo secret services in time).later continuing your administration of such units during your military career and Prime Minister period,untill 1944.certain sources linked at he with Koki Hirota(who if leader in Black Dragon Society) since short times before at your Prime Minister times and during first stages of Pacific Wartimes.

For example if mentioned why Tojo and Hirota,if meeting in Black Dragons Hq in Tokyo,for readed the informs provided by agents in secret group(related with Japanese Military Secret Services),and analized the general strategy in future war against United States, other western powers in area and Soviet Union.Hirota was one of leaders why managing the secret services in Black Dragon Society.

In same place Tojo making some comentaire respect at future of japanese policy when he gaining the power for convert in dictator of Japan,and making the war against America,in presence of proper Hirota,also theirs discuses abouth if adequate time for realzing the strike against U.S. in 1941 or 1942 in these period.

  • -Reader 72

What is the relevance of the comment regarding Tojo's favored brand of toothpaste? Is this some sort of in-joke, or just random vandalism? --Halloween jack 21:41, 18 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]


What is THIS doing in here?!?!?![edit]

What is the purpose of this sentence? "It is not known, however, which brand of toothpaste he preferred, possibly because of brazen attempts by obscure interests to suppress such inquiries."

He always looked like a Crest guy to me, but I may be wrong --KingZog 23:18, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Tojo the sculpture[edit]

The article says that Hideki Tojo was an ultranationalist thinker. And by clicking the link, you find out that he was a bronze sculpture! Surely he wasn't; we should change the link to somewhere else. --Acepectif 18:19, 31 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Tojo's Responsibility[edit]

I remember watching a BBC documentary examing the extent of the Emperor's responsibility for the war in Asia & the Pacific. The documentary suggested that Tojo was ordered by his fellows to take the heat for the war and die so that the Emperor could be spared trial. The Americans were apparently also implicated in the conspiracy, and forced him to make false confessions in court. I haven't added this because I don't have any material references to link to; incriminating the Emperor is apparently taboo in Japan.Kurzon 22:12, 16 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Peace deal with the British[edit]

On 16 February 1942, the British diplomats secretly proposed a peace deal with Japan. A possible agreement was that if Great Britain formally recognised the authority of imperial Japan over Northern China and Manchuria, the Japanese would give Britain sovereignty over the Malay Peninsula and Singapore.

Are there any sources regarding this bit of info?

When did Tojo lost his job as PM in 1944 ? July 18 or 22 ?[edit]

The main text says Tojo was forced to resign on July 18, 1944, yet the infobox under his picture says he was PM till July 22. Which date is correct ? I wonder if it took four days to get a replacement, so Tojo was still PM officially for 4 extra days after his resignation ? -- PFHLai 14:26, 18 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Military service[edit]

Following is a passage from the current article-- 2dLt (Infantry), April 1905; was graduated from War College, December 1915; official duty, Switzerland, August 1919; Major, August 1920; official duty, Germany, July 1921; LtCol, August 1924; Colonel, August 1918; Regimental Commander, 1st Infantry, August 1929; MajGen, March 1933; Commandant,"Rikugun Shikan Gakko" (Military Academy), March 1934;

To me this is poorly worded to the point that I'm not entirely certain what it's trying to say. Also, the date as listed states that he was promoted to Colonel two years before being made a Major. Should this correctly read August 1928? Also, what about his promotions to 1LT and CAPT? -- stubblyhead | T/c 21:56, 18 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Will Translation[edit]

The Will translation at the bottom looks like it was done on some computer program and thus appears very poorly done.I think we need to get a native japanese speaker to translate it into English.

I agree. While I'm not a native Japanese speaker, I do some J-E translation work. I'll have a go at translating the corresponding Japanese wiki portion, and perhaps someone more eloquent with English than I can give it the proper voice.--Eggmann 12:56, 19 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. Can't make head or tail of it! Strength to your translating arm. --Adam Brink 16:04, 21 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

WP:MILHIST Assessment[edit]

A fairly well-developed article, lots of sections, picture, infobox... Military service section needs clean-up, as does the war crimes "counts" section. No references listed. Overall length not nearly good enough for such a major figure. And does Tojo get macrons? If so, that needs to be addressed as well. LordAmeth 01:08, 12 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The entire Tojo article is Biased and Mostly wrong[edit]

Guys, I am pretty new to Wikipedia, but having read the Tojo Hideki article, it is fairly obvious that whoever wrote it has heavily, heavily tried to whitewash the role of the Emperor. The Emperor is shown as being generally 'anti-war', encouraging his subordinates to negotiate. Certainly this was the standard story that benefitted both the Americans and the Japanese in the post-war period. However, more sober analysis has shown convincingly that this view was basically fiction.

I'm sorry I can not be more helpful, as I am simply too busy to write this myself. however, the simple fact is that the parts dealing with the emperor (and whatever nonsense was there about "yamamoto's plan to invade australia" needs complete and total revision, or at least to be flagged as biased. my basic test of wikipedia is "would this pass in an 8th grade textbook?" the answer here is absolutely not.

Please be more specific instead of just generalizing, so the editors can adjust any unsuitable content. And be reasonable, as few controversial sections does not mean the whole article is "worthless", as you have stated. AQu01rius (User | Talk | Websites)  19:58, 22 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I added references from serious authors and from the Shôwa monologue itself. The specific chronology of the imperial conferences is well known and is in opposition with most of the precedent stuff. I kept the paragraph about the poor Tôjô crying even if I have never read anything about that but, without reference, it should be deleted. I had to delete this incredible assertion about Shôwa authorizing the withdrawal from China AND Manchukuo(!!!!). It had no reference and it is contrary to EVERY known primary source. --Flying tiger 23:58, 26 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Recent additions[edit]

While I appreciate the new passages' attempt to more neutrally present the Emperor's role, the old text had the virtue of flowing better. Someone well-versed in the subject should try to integrate the two versions, hopefully producing a more coherent result. The whole article, of course, could do with some improvement. Biruitorul 19:11, 13 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Strange section[edit]

Someone has added a strange section called «Will» at the bottom of the page. It is written completly out of context with a vague reference. I presume it is a declaration of Tôjô after the surrender of Japan. As there is no mention of time and place, I simply do not see its relevance. I consider it is better to simply delete it. If an user want it back, please add a context. --Flying tiger 14:30, 8 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Tojo, Tōjō, Tôjô?[edit]

just want to point out that his name has been spelled three different ways throughout the article. Sometimes in one sentence spelled one way, and in the very next sentence spelled another. Not very professional in my opinion, I would go and change it if I knew which one to use... --Rogutaan 12:37, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

  • Use "Tojo" WhisperToMe 04:41, 9 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    • At the very least, I got rid of the Tôjô because that is completely against WP:MOS-JA. I try to stay out of macron debates involving people names, though. Neier 09:48, 9 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The official spelling is the second one. "Tojo" is wrong and I presume "Tôjô" was added by users who could not write the japanese symbols withtheir computer... --Flying tiger 13:54, 9 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"Tojo" is now the guy's name is most commonly written, so use that. WhisperToMe 15:17, 9 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The very first line of the article says: "In this Japanese name, the family name is "Yölö". That seems completely wrong to me, unless the "Yö" in "Yölö" is pronounced as the English word "toe". The first character of Tojo's last name is the "higashi" character meaning "east" which is pronounced "toe". The correct line should be: "In this Japanese name, the family name is "Tojo". -- buraian - Tokyo, Japan

Reference[edit]

The "Yomiuri Shimbun" has an article on Tojo in a series called "War Responsibility Verification" at www.yomiuri.co.jp/dy/features/0007/. Article 9 is "Main blame lies with Tojo". 16 July 2007

World War 1[edit]

What was his involvement with the Japanese military during the first world war? --NEMT 18:58, 4 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Capture, Trial, and Execution list of nations[edit]

Under the Capture, Trial, and Execution Section, it is listed as waging war against the British Commonwealth (Hong Kong). This fails to mention Burma, Malaysia, or Papua New Guinea, which were attacked as well. Rucha 04:17, 20 September 2007 (UTC) User:Rucha58

You're quite right and the article is incorrect: count 31 dealt with "a war of aggression and a war in violation of international law, treaties, agreements and assurances against the British Commonwealth of Nations". It wasn't restricted merely to Hong Kong. I've removed the reference to Hong Kong. Jimmy Pitt (talk) 22:38, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"Tojo" as a derogatory name[edit]

I was perusing Judge Dredd comics that were compiled from the mid-1980s, and I noticed that the character would call an Asian villain "Tojo" as a slang name. It appears to originate from Hideki Tojo, and I believe I've seen in other older works where the term "Tojo" was used as a derogatory name used for any Japanese person. Any ideas of what to make of it and if it should be included here or in an article about racism against Asians? I'd be happy to scan the images from the Dredd comic. --Bobak (talk) 20:56, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That would be good, except if that would be the one and only reference to him in popular culture, it would be one short and unnecessary section =/ --Hamster X (talk) 09:18, 15 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Tojo is a fairly common derogatory name for Japanese. Another example from pop culture is the Cotton character on King of the Hill. He refers to anyone who is Japanese as "Tojo" Ennisj (talk) 16:30, 20 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Tojo as a hated figure[edit]

Should mention that in the U.S. during WW2 Tojo was seen as the Japanese Hitler, and was widely caricatured and derided in propaganda material. Japan was sometimes called "Tojoland"... AnonMoos (talk) 14:07, 18 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A Hirohito's soldier[edit]

As a brazilian general told decades ago:"Military means obedience".Hideki Tojo never did nothing, against the wishes of japanese emperor Hirohito.Using atomic bombs as a cover, "Uncle Sam", forgave the war crimes of Emperor Hirohito, in exchange of his total support during Cold War.This deal was excellent for both:United States and Hirohito.In politics, there's no foes or frieds;there's interests and targets.Agre22 (talk) 02:12, 8 August 2008 (UTC)agre22[reply]

You are right Agre22. Shovon (talk) 18:05, 3 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
No, he was not - and he was indefinitely banned from the project for just this sort on utter nonsense. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.67.15.172 (talk) 03:37, 27 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Tojo willingly took the fall to protect Hirohito from prosecution, along with several other Japanese military figures. It was in the best interest of both the Allies and Japan that Hirohito remain in power, as he was the only authority figure in Japan who could act as a unifying force for the great changes in Japanese postwar society. Jsc1973 (talk) 15:22, 25 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Humanitarian[edit]

Is there any reason he is listed in the Category: Humanitarians? --195.0.221.197 (talk) 14:41, 2 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No disrespect to the man, but that is funny[edit]

So he tries to kill himself, with a marking where his heart is and he shoots himself there four times at point-blank range and he pisses every time and hits himself in the stomach instead and lives. Suicide sometimes just fails, doesn't it? What makes this even funnier, is the fact he was a majour general in the Japanese Imperial Army and he can't make the shot. How did he even get pass basic training? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.129.235.101 (talk) 19:10, 8 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

source[edit]

a source for this article was another article about hideki tojo on WW2db.com. said article says at the bottom that its source is wikipedia. not good...--Violarulez (talk) 04:55, 13 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

What's with the article layout?[edit]

The entire page is fishy. The search bar on the left-hand column of boxes (e.g. navigation, interaction...) is missing entirely and the sections are spaced differently. The tabs (article, history...) are also shifted, like some other wiki. Hideki Tojo does not look like its talk page at all. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.108.11.41 (talk) 05:39, 16 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Clarification please[edit]

In the opening paragraph it reads :- "Some historians hold him responsible for the bombing of Pearl Harbor ..." How can there be any doubt? He was prime minister. Who else could have been responsible?  SmokeyTheCat  •TALK• 08:19, 24 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Because Tojo was not yet prime minister when planning for the attack began. This may have been as early as the fall of 1940, when the Japanese began contemplating a preemptive air strike against the U.S. Pacific Fleet, similar to the attack made by the British against the Italians at Taranto in November of that year. The decision to wage war against the United States, and the decision to initiate that war with the Imperial Navy's risky plan to bomb distant Pearl Harbor, rather than the Imperial Army's plan to invade the American Philippines, was probably made by a committee of high ranking military officers, with Tojo as one of several key players. Nearly all important decisions of the Japanese government were made this way, although some decisions, such as the attack at the Marco Polo Bridge that led to the second war against China, may have been made by over-enthusiastic officers in the Kwantung Army, without orders from higher authorities. These authorities nevertheless supported the war once it began, including Tojo, who was then chief of staff of the Kwantung Army.
And of course, Japan's decision to surrender unconditionally was made by Emperor Hirohito alone, against the wishes of his own generals and admirals. They expected to inflict millions of casualties against the inevitable invasion of the home islands, forcing the Allied powers to negotiate a ceasefire, in which Japan would keep its independence and its colonies in Korea and Taiwan. Japan was an authoritarian military state, but not a totalitarian dictatorship like Germany or the Soviet Union. Tojo did not command absolute power like Hitler or Stalin did, and Tojo had to answer to the other officers in the high command. In fact, Tojo was forced to resign by these officers in 1944, as the American navy began advancing deep into Japan's southern Pacific empire. Hitler committed suicide before he would relinquish power. Even so, Tojo was one of the highest-ranking generals in the army, and an adviser to prime minister Fumimaro Konoe in 1940, so there is no question that Tojo was among the important decision-makers who supported war against the United States.
winstonho0805 (talk) 19:44, 13 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Phony suicide[edit]

It is not possible to shoot oneself four times in the chest.Eregli bob (talk) 01:42, 8 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It may or may not be possible. It's irrelevant since no one claimed Tojo was shot more than once in the chest. --Yaush (talk) 22:37, 10 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Wasn't Tojo's role in Pearl Harbour exaggerated to save the royal family?[edit]

I think it must be mentioned that the U.S. government based on their new relationship with the Japanese did not want to antagonize them further and worked together with the Japanese authorities to downplay the Emperor's role in the war and put the blame more on Tojo. Its not fair to put all the blame on Tojo. I noticed especially in the introductory paragraph "As Prime Minister, he was directly responsible for the attack on Pearl Harbor, which led to the war between Japan and the United States" he may have been involved but was not solely responsible. --blackdove66

Tojo agreed to take full responsibility for Japanese actions during World War II to prevent any member of the Royal Family from being indicted. (AdrianCoyle (talk) 20:28, 3 February 2012 (UTC))[reply]
As ever, sources trump. Bring reliable sources and discuss them here. Binksternet (talk) 23:56, 3 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The article doesn't put 'sole blame' on Tojo - the Japanese militarists as a whole are responsible for initiating Japan's war of imperial conquest - but Tojo was a prime player in these decisions, as supported by innumerable history texts. A good source to pick up, blackdove66, is award-winning writer John Toland's 2-volume "The Rising Sun" - he had access to many of the inner circle via interviews and it pretty well lays out who supported what in the Japanese government during the period. HammerFilmFan (talk) 01:00, 28 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move[edit]

The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the proposal was moved. --BDD (talk) 22:42, 20 March 2013 (UTC) (non-admin closure)[reply]

Hideki Tōjō → Hideki Tojo – The nondiacritic version is almost universal in English. Ngrams does not even have Tōjō, it's so rare in English. 12.180.227.126 (talk) 14:01, 13 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

"Tōjō" doesn't show up in Google results because Google can't deal with the macronned ō. Clicking on the actual book scans linked from the Ngram shows that some do use "Tōjō". —  AjaxSmack  02:50, 16 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support WP:UE WP:UCN -- common form in English, appears in a boatload of English language sources, so easy to establish English usage. -- 65.92.180.137 (talk) 23:42, 13 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strongly support. During all of World War II and after I never saw any use of Tojo except in that fashion. Well, that's just me, but I'm sure if you tried to find Tojo spelled any other way than that, you would be hard-pressed to come up with more than a handful of examples. GeorgeLouis (talk) 01:22, 14 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Books written by specialists on Japanese history (and any other field) mostly use some variant of Hepburn Romanization. Some of them tend to strictly adhere to correct Hepburn, which would spell this particular wartime PM's name with diacritics. George Sansom's definitive work A History of Japan stops in the 1860s, so it doesn't mention him, but if it did it would use diacritics. I know, however, that it's a growing tendency on Wikipedia to move away from this standard of romanization in cases where every Tom, Dick and Harry has heard of some particular Japanese person and thinks the person's name is never spelled correctly. I am also aware that a large number of newspapers, books and so on on the subject of "World War II", written by non-Japanese speakers, probably spell this person's name without diacritics. That's why I'm not actually casting an oppose !vote here. 118.243.215.117 (talk) 09:11, 14 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
What do you mean going away? It was always the case that we used the commonly used name, until various national wikiprojects started to move articles to a standardized romanization/diacritic scheme, even if it meant using names not found in English (how is it English Wikipedia if we use versions of names not found in English when other versions are found in English?). As this person appears in many World War II history books, and specialists in World War II history frequently cover this person, strictly restricting the academic material under consideration produced by only Japanese historians is very parochial. -- 65.92.180.137 (talk) 09:31, 14 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
MOSJ has been this way for a long time. And please don't misrepresent what I said -- I was talking about western scholars of Japanese history, but the way you worded the above it implies you think I think we should only be citing historians who are Japanese. 118.243.215.117 (talk) 10:29, 14 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
"until various national wikiprojects" - 65.92.180.137 less of that please, unless you think Renée Coleman is the result of an invasion by the Anglophone Canadian editor wikiproject. In ictu oculi (talk) 17:56, 19 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Name[edit]

I removed After 1941 he would change his given name from the Chinese-inspired "Eiki" to the traditionally more Japanese "Hideki" (see on'yomi). It's very dubious and probably an error, cited though. Unfortunately there are errors found in en sources, even though they are thought as RSs. His father's name is Hidenori and it's natural that his son's name is Hideki. On'yomi names are very rare. They are usually nicknames like Hirobumi Ito is sometimes called Ito Hakubun. As far as I searched, there are no ja page says his name was Eiki. Please find RSs in ja. Oda Mari (talk) 06:51, 10 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Tora Tora Tora[edit]

I don't think it was directed by Masuda. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.193.255.27 (talk) 05:04, 24 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Tojo Bakufu?[edit]

A professional army general in charge of Japan. Was he a reincarnation of the Bakufu?84.13.51.52 (talk) 19:39, 7 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

There are some loose parallels, and it's possible that Tojo aspired to be a shogun, but he never succeeded in concentrating that much power. Later he complained bitterly about the handicaps he had in having to build consensus for any new policy, comparing his position unfavorably with the dictators of the other Axis powers. --Yaush (talk) 14:56, 7 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Technically he WAS a Shogun as Shogun is simply a generic term for General. But in the sense of the Bakufu, how far do the parallels go between Tojo, and by extention, the Imperial Japananese Army and Navy and the Dai-Shogun and by extension, the Bakufu?84.13.51.52 (talk) 19:38, 7 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The Japanese word "将軍" has two definitions and is translated into two different English words, "Shogun" and "general officer". [2] 将軍/shogun is a shortened form of 征夷大将軍, but a general in Army and Navy is not a 征夷大将軍. You confuse the two definitions. Please learn Japanese. Oda Mari (talk) 08:41, 10 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
In this context I don't need to. I am a Chinese speaker. Some periods of Imperial China the Chinese had a similar position called simply 大将軍. The way to differentiate between General Officer and Shogun in Chinese is also 将軍 and 大将軍. In Chinese usage, the common term for the 征夷大将軍 is Bakufu Dai-Shogun. But back to the discussion at hand, how strong are the parallels between the Bakufu and the Tojo Cabinet?82.33.214.35 (talk) 14:42, 12 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
On the surface yes, but in reality, no. Tojo was more of a follower than a leader. It is striking that there was never a personality cult around Tojo during all his time as Prime Minister, and when the Emperor wanted Tojo out in July 1944, he went without any protest. Tojo was fanatically committed to obeying the Emperor, which was not the case with the Shoguns of the Bakufu. This may sound hard to believe today, but for Tojo, the Emperor really was a living god, which explains why Tojo was slavishly committed to obeying the Emperor's every wish. Tojo was a man without a mind or will of his own, being just in his own words a "good slave" to the Emperor, whom he worshipped as a god. Yes, the Shoguns of old professed to believe that the Emperors really were living gods, but it is doubtful that most of them actually believed that, and usually the Shoguns didn't much care about what the Emperors thought. Tojo's powers were those of a chairman of a fractious committee than those of a classic fascist leader or a Shogun of the Bakufu, and it was always the Emperor who held ultimate power. Tojo, the "good slave" to the Emperor right to the end, loyally took the blame for decisions made by his master at the Tokyo war crimes trial and was hanged whereas the Emperor got away with everything scot-free, dying at the ripe old age of 86 in 1989, still reigning as Emperor. True, at one point Tojo let it slip that nothing happened without getting the Emperor's approval first, but the next day, he was back on script, perjuring himself with the statement that sent him to the gallows that he wanted to bomb Pearl Harbour over the Emperor's wishes. It is hard to see a Shogun doing that. I don't think the parallels are very strong.--A.S. Brown (talk) 06:16, 24 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Pittsburg Post Gazette[edit]

Have removed a sentence from the section on his suicide that claimed "It was not until approximately two hours after his suicide attempt that military police and a physician attended to Tojo." This is simply cited to the Pittsburgh Post Gazette Newspaper with no further explanation or date of issue. This contradicts the 2nd paragraph of the suicide section which describes the MPs surrounding his house to have heard the shot and then rushed in. While it is possible that it took 2 hours for him to be seen by a physician, the MPs were clearly right there, and without further details about this Post article, I think it prudent to remove this for now. Cannolis (talk) 15:27, 4 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Assessment comment[edit]

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Hideki Tojo/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.

The Hideki Tojo website is severely lacking. I would hope that someone would come along and fix it! The information on the site is great; but it is careless, sloppy writing that frequently makes little to no sense. MAJOR editing is needed.

Substituted at 05:11, 13 May 2016 (UTC)

"Many historians criticize" - Changed the weasel words and removed the unsupported citations[edit]

I changed the following paragraph, removing citations 34 and 1

Many historians[34][1] criticize the work done by General Douglas MacArthur and his staff to exonerate Emperor Hirohito and all members of the imperial family from criminal prosecutions. According to them, MacArthur and Brigadier General Bonner Fellers worked to protect the Emperor and shift ultimate responsibility to Tojo.[35][36][37]


The phrase "Many historians criticize" had two citations, neither supporting the statement. The first is a dead link to the article "Hirohito's Triump" that appears to have since been moved to a new url on the same site This article does not mention Hideki Tojo or any attempt to shift blame from the Emperor. The most relevant section I could find is as follows:

Unknown to both the emperor and his warlords, however, in Washington the retention of Hirohito as at least the spiritual and symbolic ruler of Japan had already been agreed upon on August 10. Former U.S. ambassador to Tokyo Joseph C. Grew told President Truman at the White House “that even if the question had not been raised by the Japanese, we would have to continue to accept the emperor ourselves under our commander’s supervision.

“In order to get him to surrender the many scattered armies of the Japanese who would own no other authority, and that something like this use of the emperor must be made in order to save us from a score of bloody Iwo Jimas and Okinawas all over China and the New Netherlands.

“He was the only source of authority in Japan under the Japanese theory of the state.”

This was the view also expressed to Truman by Secretary of War Henry L. Stimson and other key advisers. In 1955, Truman himself posed the questions he had faced a decade earlier: “Could we continue the emperor, and yet expect to eliminate the warlike spirit in Japan? Could we even consider a message with so large a ‘but’ to the kind of unconditional surrender we had fought for?”

In 1973, Margaret Truman added, “My father agreed, but in a way that did not compromise his position, that the people of Japan must remain free to choose their own form of government.”

I would not describe this as critical, nor does it make any mention of MacArthur, his staff, or any attempt by them to shift blame. As for the second citation, the relevant passage consists of a single non-critical sentence,

Meanwhile, the Allies, especially MacArthur, went to great lengths to ensure that Emperor Hirohito would be shielded from war crimes accusations.

followed by an excerpt from MacArthur's own memoirs justifying the act. No further comment is made of this in the book. In short, these citations don't support the claim that many historians are critical, and as such I have removed them.

With regards to the sources at the end of the paragraph, Bix, and to lesser extent Dower, are in fact extremely critical of Showa and also of the actions taken to save him from trial. However, two is not many, and specificity is better than vague words which can imply more than the sources say, so I changed the paragraph to mention them specifically.

Monkeyfoetus (talk) 08:11, 13 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Hideki Tojo. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:03, 2 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

discrepancy re which number prime minister ?[edit]

the text suggests Tojo is the 26th Prime minister of Japan, but the photo has a caption suggesting he is the 40th. Which is it ? Is an edit thus required ? ---- Russell van Hooff. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 49.197.209.205 (talk) 08:53, 29 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Jisei / death poem weirdness[edit]

I noted a weird uncited section under "Arrest, trial, and execution" with Tojo's purported death poem in Japanese only. The user who added it had a couple of his other changes reverted. It doesn't seem to have a citation. The same poem is in the Japanese version of the article, also uncited, as far as I can tell. Googling around reveals a few random Japanese websites that indicate this may be his jisei, although I don't know if they are reputable enough to cite as a source.

I tried a bit to find an English translation but failed. The closest I found was in this [1] book, but appears to be a totally different poem.

Would be nice if we could find a legitimate source and translation, or perhaps it should just be deleted? For now I just threw in a "citation needed" Jbboehr (talk) 06:43, 23 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Managed to find a possible translation for the second line [2] but I can't see much of the book in Google Books. Jbboehr (talk) 07:29, 23 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ Browne, Courtney (1969). Tojo : the last banzai. London: Corgi. p. 254. ISBN 0552080616.
  2. ^ Hoyt, Edwin P. (2001). Warlord : Tojo Against the World. Cooper Square Press. p. 2. ISBN 0815411715.

Semi-protected edit request on 28 October 2023[edit]

I request for Crimes against humanity to be added on his profile where it says Conviction(s). 95.151.245.1 (talk) 11:12, 28 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done Per the source cited in the article text, [3], he was convicted of Crimes against Peace and War Crimes, but not Crimes against Humanity. - Rotary Engine talk 12:22, 28 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 30 October 2023[edit]

I request for the Category:People indicted for crimes against humanity to be added to the External Links. 95.151.245.1 (talk) 11:17, 30 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done Per the source cited in the article text, [4], he was indicted for Crimes against Peace and War Crimes, but not Crimes against Humanity. - Rotary Engine talk 12:59, 30 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
He was convicted of Crimes against Peace and War Crimes, but wasn’t he indicted for Crimes against Humanity. 95.151.245.1 (talk) 13:39, 30 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
According to the judgement of the International Military Tribunal for the Far East, Tojo was charged under Counts 1, 27, 29, 31, 32, 33, 36, 54 and 55. The first seven deal with crimes against peace; the last two with conventional war crimes. He was found guilty on Counts 1, 27, 29, 31, 32, 33 and 54; acquitted on Count 36; no finding was returned for Count 55.
Although the IMTFE set up a framework to bring to trial charges in three categories: A) crimes against peace; B) war crimes; C) crimes against humanity; and often conflated the latter two, it seems that they only tried charges under the first two categories. Totani Yuma, writing in "Beyond Victor's Justice? The Tokyo War Crimes Trial Revisited" [5] gives a good overview, including some background into the decisions.
But, if there's reliable sources to the contrary, it would be good to see them. - Rotary Engine talk 06:09, 31 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Hideki_Tojo&oldid=1216345483"