This is my honest retrospection on "anti-war" education I received as I grew up in Japan, and some personal thoughts on it.

Japanese anti-war education encompasses a variety of topics, such as Atomic Bombs, the Battle of Okinawa, and the (in)famous Kamikaze suicide attackers. Now that the majority of Japanese have never gone through a warfare, this is a crucial opportunity for the younger generations to learn about "the cruelty of war."

My official anti-war education began in my elementary school, around 2nd or 3rd grade. It took place in history, social studies, Japanese, and special homeroom class. We read and listened to stories of the survivors, watched documentaries and dramas, wrote essays, did research, and presented in class. I believe it was required every year, and I'd say it was pretty extensive enough to convince us little kids that we shall never wage a war again. In my middle school senior year (9th grade in the US), I got to visit both Okinawa and Hiroshima for local school-affiliated activities that served part of the larger anti-war education agenda. Thus, I now have a good grasp of what the Japanese government wants to teach its citizens about Japan being an "anti-war nation."

Of course, we were barely, if any, taught about what Japan did to the surrounding countries. I don't remember learning anything about Comfort Women or the details of the Nanking Massacre in class. I was never taught what exactly Japan did to Koreans and other peoples inside and outside of Japan. Instead, we were lectured repeatedly about what kind of cruelty we received in order to highlight the cruelty of warfare. The stories of civilian victims and survivors are still appropriated as a tool for disseminating anti-war sentiment that should come from nationalistic and defensive attitudes, rather than humility and responsibility. This is obviously intentional, considering how we learned a lot more about Holocaust in class and how it took me years to learn about Zainichi Korean victims and survivors of the Atomic Bombs who received little to no support from the government. In addition, the narratives around the Battle of Okinawa is told and heard quite often, almost as though Japan would of course care about Okinawa. These stories are counted in the damages Japan received, constructing Okinawa as legitimate part of Japan and presenting them as "one of us." This is clearly bullshit because right after 9/11, so many Japanese stopped visiting Okinawa, essentially abandoning it out of ignorant fear of potential terrorist attacks against the US bases in which Okinawa is located. As we can see, it's much easier to point out others' mistakes and frauds than admitting own, especially when we're so convinced that we're the true victims. Sure, we are victims too, but who are "we" really?

I'm not trying to be the first person to criticize Japan's biased anti-war education here. I'm pretty sure many smarter people have already done that job decades ago. And I mean, how many Americans know much more about the Atomic Bombs than Pearl Harbor, right? The truth remains that today so many of us still don't even really know about the Invasion of Iraq.

What I'm really thinking is, if anti-war education, formal or informal, in Japan or any country, is ever to become any less biased, it needs to mature fundamentally and go beyond the dichotomous narratives of "victim" versus "assaulter," "winner" versus "loser," or more simply "us" versus "them." And it's not to say naïvely that "we all lose (something) if we fight" because there are reasons why we wage a war: to gain something. Of course, we still need to know what happened, but history and anti-war education are not the same thing. We need to teach that war or any kind of violence is unacceptable, not because who did what to whom, but because it is unacceptable. Sure, it's Japan's responsibility to send out anti-nuclear weapon messages, but it's not because Japan has been the only victim. It's all countries' responsibility.

To do so, specifically, it needs to employ way more critical discourse and make real efforts to answer some of the most difficult questions:

1. Exactly what constitutes as "waging a war"––Having military forces? Sending troops? Hosting US military bases? Providing financial assistance?
2. Exactly why we shall never wage a war or possess nuclear weapons.
3. Why people would wage wars and possess nuclear weapons all the time.
4. What we could do to prevent a war and denuclearize the world.

This questioning must begin as early in lifetime (and soon!) as possible because we cannot teach younger generations that we shall never wage a war while doing it ourselves or allowing it to happen. We already have too much hypocrisy, and I'd really like our generation to be real to/with our younger generations.

I know this is nothing new to some people. I know I'm not providing any answers. But I want us to begin or join a dialogue about non-violent alternatives to which we all can actually contribute more than just wearing a sweatshop-produced T-shirt that says "MAKE LOVE NOT WAR."