We no longer do this as an official policy but, in the past, the policy has always been to vilify or dehumanize people from countries that we were at war with. This was done through television, movies, cartoons, and comic books. Although it's no longer done through political channels, those who actually fight the wars still do this, at least to some extent. Here are some comics that were run during World War II, with the encouragement of the government.
@Ken Anderson For using the word "Jap", you would be immediately banned from that other seniors forum; I was thus dealt with for using the comparatively less "offensive" word "Chinaman". Strange. Frank
I don't want people referring to ethnicities or whole groups of people in derogatory terms either. It's a matter of context, however. It's not a word that I use to refer to the Japanese, but it was the name of the World War II campaign, which is the historical focus of this thread. To not use it would be paramount to refusing to acknowledge the reality of the holocaust because you disagreed with gassing thousands of people. Whether you agree with it or not, it happened. In wartime, we have referred to our enemy in derogatory terms, including some that were more offensive than "Jap." Meanwhile, the Germans were referred to as "Jerries" or "Krauts," the objective being to not have to refer to them as people or fellow human beings.
@Ken Anderson Understood and agreed. My point is related to the "P.C." concept of great numbers of folks becoming "adjusted" to particular ways of thinking that were before relatively unimportant to them. IOW, mass mind control. Similar to your explanation above, my context was to repeat what our doctor had said, when he unwrapped the previous-nights bandages from around my head and face: "The Chinaman (Chinese intern he knew at the hospital) should never have bandaged this". Frank
Derogatory terms, coarseness, and epithets can stunt conversation, but sometimes political correctness does that too, particularly when it comes to censoring history.
Aside from being shocked by politically incorrect names, the larger point is that governments and armies have used this throughout history as a way of preparing soldiers to be able to kill these people. It helps if they look different too, but if you can assign a derogatory name to them, it's easier to think of them as something other than human beings with first and last names, families, jobs, a desire to live their lives, and be there to see their grandchildren. Recognizing that this is something that makes war easier, governments often made campaigns out of it, as with the Japanese during World War II, but epithets were applied to everyone we've been at war with, and I am sure that other countries and people have done the same. In a politically correct age, our government no longer assigns these labels, but they are applied nevertheless, because war is so much easier when you're not thinking of the enemy as someone like yourself. Isn't this pretty much the same thing that racists do in civilian life? It's done for largely the same reasons, too. When we refer to black people with the n-word or with other epithets, we are denying their humanity, and that makes it easier to hate them, and to apply this hatred across a whole spectrum of people. To be sure, it goes both ways, and in all directions. I'm not just talking about white Americans. The simple answer is political correctness. If you don't allow people to use these words, you don't allow them to be thus stripped of their humanity. There is some sense to that, and I agree that people who use such words to describe various races of people should be ostracized. I wouldn't vote for someone who referred to people of another race using a derogatory term, and I probably wouldn't want to hire them, to shop in their stores, or spend my time listening to that kind of talk. Socially, I think this works. As a matter of public policy or law, it can do more harm than good because it tends to solidify positions that might otherwise be fluid. Laws cannot make people like one another. I am digressing, but I did want to point out the fact that tactics that we use to make war easier are the same as those that are used in civilian life to make hatred and discrimination easier, and they are used because they are effective.
When damning the Japanese in War posters and comic books, they were always shown as having buck teeth and a yellow coloration. The Nazis were shown with evil gestures, brutalizing those people they conquered. I was a schoolboy during WW2, and naturally, we delighted in drawing members of the Axis Powers in most unflattering ways. Hal
I'm trying to remember if anything like that was done during the Vietnam war. If it was, I can't remember it. Do you?
I did not serve, so I am sure there were some less complimentary terms used, but I know they were referred to as "VC," as the abbreviation for Viet Cong, or as "Charlie," for the phonetic alphabet for VC - Victor Charlie. I know that the general epithet, "gook," was also used.
My brother served three terms. He had some colorful words to describe the Viet Cong but not any that I can put here.
@Ken Anderson When my nephew in the Marines returned from Okinawa in 1967, he referred to the Japanese as "gooks", a term we had never heard before in our little isolated community of ex-European Slavs. Frank
Interesting Bowery Boys clip just posted on another topic. Last few lines " you should not have hit him reply Why was he was a Jap retort by the Police officer NO he was Chinese. CREST fallen look on the punks faces.