Was there a Japanese equivalent of the Gestapo during WW2
up vote
10
down vote
favorite
Colonial Japanese rule on occupied territories has been described as harsh as has been their treatment of prisoners of war. In some cases, this was not a fleeting occupation but one lasting years or decades. Surely, not all of the people in these areas agreed with this treatment and there must have been measures to enforce Japanese laws. There are many parallels drawn with their allies in Nazi Germany. Was there a Japanese equivalent of the Gestapo (or Secret Police)? Did they operate in the Japanese home islands or only in colonial territories?
world-war-two japan police
asked yesterday
Tom Kelly
2059
add a comment |
up vote
10
down vote
favorite
Colonial Japanese rule on occupied territories has been described as harsh as has been their treatment of prisoners of war. In some cases, this was not a fleeting occupation but one lasting years or decades. Surely, not all of the people in these areas agreed with this treatment and there must have been measures to enforce Japanese laws. There are many parallels drawn with their allies in Nazi Germany. Was there a Japanese equivalent of the Gestapo (or Secret Police)? Did they operate in the Japanese home islands or only in colonial territories?
world-war-two japan police
asked yesterday
Tom Kelly
2059
add a comment |
up vote
10
down vote
favorite
up vote
10
down vote
favorite
Colonial Japanese rule on occupied territories has been described as harsh as has been their treatment of prisoners of war. In some cases, this was not a fleeting occupation but one lasting years or decades. Surely, not all of the people in these areas agreed with this treatment and there must have been measures to enforce Japanese laws. There are many parallels drawn with their allies in Nazi Germany. Was there a Japanese equivalent of the Gestapo (or Secret Police)? Did they operate in the Japanese home islands or only in colonial territories?
world-war-two japan police
asked yesterday
Tom Kelly
2059
Colonial Japanese rule on occupied territories has been described as harsh as has been their treatment of prisoners of war. In some cases, this was not a fleeting occupation but one lasting years or decades. Surely, not all of the people in these areas agreed with this treatment and there must have been measures to enforce Japanese laws. There are many parallels drawn with their allies in Nazi Germany. Was there a Japanese equivalent of the Gestapo (or Secret Police)? Did they operate in the Japanese home islands or only in colonial territories?
world-war-two japan police
world-war-two japan police
asked yesterday
Tom Kelly
2059
asked yesterday
Tom Kelly
2059
asked yesterday
Tom Kelly
2059
asked yesterday
Tom Kelly
2059
asked yesterday
Tom Kelly
2059
2059
add a comment |
add a comment |
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
up vote
18
down vote
accepted
Yes, that would be the Kenpeitai. It was a military police corps, founded in 1881. The kenpeitai had jurisdiction everywhere within the Japanese empire and their conquered territories.
Although it was a military police corps, everyone fell under their jurisdiction. Not just the military, civilians as well.
The naval equivalent was the Tokkeitai. Both units acted uniformed and in plain clothes. They were both known for their very harsh and brutal treatment of their victims. Both units were disbanded in august 1945.
The kenpeitai was much larger and under control of the army. The tokkeitai was smaller, under control of the navy, but just as brutal. Both were used by the military governments as an instrument of terror on their own population.
added: I think KeMpeitai, with an m, is correct. However, I don't speak Japanese. That's why I stick with Wikipedia's transcription of the name.
answered 23 hours ago
Jos
7,74311741
4
It should be Kempeitai or Kempei Tai, not "Kenpeitai", i.e. M instead of N. I can see Wikipedia has it as N, but almost all official documents in English refers to this unit with an M. For instance, Government of Singapore on their experience during Japanese occupation of Malaya and Singapore, 1941-5: link
– J Asia
16 hours ago
4
@JAsia it's the issue with Japanese romanization that ん in 憲兵隊 (けんぺいたい) can be read as either M or N...
– Andrew T.
15 hours ago
@AndrewT. And it's usually transliterated as an 'n' because that's the perdominant pronunciation in most words. Depending on the word though, there's usually one form that's 'correct', though in some cases the actual sound may be somewhere between 'n' and 'm'.
– Austin Hemmelgarn
13 hours ago
5
Which it is is largely systematic, depending on whether the following consonant is labial. But this is a stupid argument. Both written forms are used and there's no reason to chastize someone for using the form that's not the one you prefer.
– R..
12 hours ago
N is the Hepburn romanisation of ん so I think this is good for consistency with any documents using that.
– Tom Kelly
7 hours ago
|
show 1 more comment
up vote
1
down vote
The Kenpeitai operated both at home and in the occupied territories.
answered yesterday
dtcm840
1874
New contributor
dtcm840 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
add a comment |
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
up vote
18
down vote
accepted
Yes, that would be the Kenpeitai. It was a military police corps, founded in 1881. The kenpeitai had jurisdiction everywhere within the Japanese empire and their conquered territories.
Although it was a military police corps, everyone fell under their jurisdiction. Not just the military, civilians as well.
The naval equivalent was the Tokkeitai. Both units acted uniformed and in plain clothes. They were both known for their very harsh and brutal treatment of their victims. Both units were disbanded in august 1945.
The kenpeitai was much larger and under control of the army. The tokkeitai was smaller, under control of the navy, but just as brutal. Both were used by the military governments as an instrument of terror on their own population.
added: I think KeMpeitai, with an m, is correct. However, I don't speak Japanese. That's why I stick with Wikipedia's transcription of the name.
answered 23 hours ago
Jos
7,74311741
4
It should be Kempeitai or Kempei Tai, not "Kenpeitai", i.e. M instead of N. I can see Wikipedia has it as N, but almost all official documents in English refers to this unit with an M. For instance, Government of Singapore on their experience during Japanese occupation of Malaya and Singapore, 1941-5: link
– J Asia
16 hours ago
4
@JAsia it's the issue with Japanese romanization that ん in 憲兵隊 (けんぺいたい) can be read as either M or N...
– Andrew T.
15 hours ago
@AndrewT. And it's usually transliterated as an 'n' because that's the perdominant pronunciation in most words. Depending on the word though, there's usually one form that's 'correct', though in some cases the actual sound may be somewhere between 'n' and 'm'.
– Austin Hemmelgarn
13 hours ago
5
Which it is is largely systematic, depending on whether the following consonant is labial. But this is a stupid argument. Both written forms are used and there's no reason to chastize someone for using the form that's not the one you prefer.
– R..
12 hours ago
N is the Hepburn romanisation of ん so I think this is good for consistency with any documents using that.
– Tom Kelly
7 hours ago
|
show 1 more comment
up vote
18
down vote
accepted
Yes, that would be the Kenpeitai. It was a military police corps, founded in 1881. The kenpeitai had jurisdiction everywhere within the Japanese empire and their conquered territories.
Although it was a military police corps, everyone fell under their jurisdiction. Not just the military, civilians as well.
The naval equivalent was the Tokkeitai. Both units acted uniformed and in plain clothes. They were both known for their very harsh and brutal treatment of their victims. Both units were disbanded in august 1945.
The kenpeitai was much larger and under control of the army. The tokkeitai was smaller, under control of the navy, but just as brutal. Both were used by the military governments as an instrument of terror on their own population.
added: I think KeMpeitai, with an m, is correct. However, I don't speak Japanese. That's why I stick with Wikipedia's transcription of the name.
answered 23 hours ago
Jos
7,74311741
4
It should be Kempeitai or Kempei Tai, not "Kenpeitai", i.e. M instead of N. I can see Wikipedia has it as N, but almost all official documents in English refers to this unit with an M. For instance, Government of Singapore on their experience during Japanese occupation of Malaya and Singapore, 1941-5: link
– J Asia
16 hours ago
4
@JAsia it's the issue with Japanese romanization that ん in 憲兵隊 (けんぺいたい) can be read as either M or N...
– Andrew T.
15 hours ago
@AndrewT. And it's usually transliterated as an 'n' because that's the perdominant pronunciation in most words. Depending on the word though, there's usually one form that's 'correct', though in some cases the actual sound may be somewhere between 'n' and 'm'.
– Austin Hemmelgarn
13 hours ago
5
Which it is is largely systematic, depending on whether the following consonant is labial. But this is a stupid argument. Both written forms are used and there's no reason to chastize someone for using the form that's not the one you prefer.
– R..
12 hours ago
N is the Hepburn romanisation of ん so I think this is good for consistency with any documents using that.
– Tom Kelly
7 hours ago
|
show 1 more comment
up vote
18
down vote
accepted
up vote
18
down vote
accepted
Yes, that would be the Kenpeitai. It was a military police corps, founded in 1881. The kenpeitai had jurisdiction everywhere within the Japanese empire and their conquered territories.
Although it was a military police corps, everyone fell under their jurisdiction. Not just the military, civilians as well.
The naval equivalent was the Tokkeitai. Both units acted uniformed and in plain clothes. They were both known for their very harsh and brutal treatment of their victims. Both units were disbanded in august 1945.
The kenpeitai was much larger and under control of the army. The tokkeitai was smaller, under control of the navy, but just as brutal. Both were used by the military governments as an instrument of terror on their own population.
added: I think KeMpeitai, with an m, is correct. However, I don't speak Japanese. That's why I stick with Wikipedia's transcription of the name.
answered 23 hours ago
Jos
7,74311741
Yes, that would be the Kenpeitai. It was a military police corps, founded in 1881. The kenpeitai had jurisdiction everywhere within the Japanese empire and their conquered territories.
Although it was a military police corps, everyone fell under their jurisdiction. Not just the military, civilians as well.
The naval equivalent was the Tokkeitai. Both units acted uniformed and in plain clothes. They were both known for their very harsh and brutal treatment of their victims. Both units were disbanded in august 1945.
The kenpeitai was much larger and under control of the army. The tokkeitai was smaller, under control of the navy, but just as brutal. Both were used by the military governments as an instrument of terror on their own population.
added: I think KeMpeitai, with an m, is correct. However, I don't speak Japanese. That's why I stick with Wikipedia's transcription of the name.
answered 23 hours ago
Jos
7,74311741
edited 5 hours ago
answered 23 hours ago
Jos
7,74311741
answered 23 hours ago
Jos
7,74311741
answered 23 hours ago
Jos
7,74311741
7,74311741
4
It should be Kempeitai or Kempei Tai, not "Kenpeitai", i.e. M instead of N. I can see Wikipedia has it as N, but almost all official documents in English refers to this unit with an M. For instance, Government of Singapore on their experience during Japanese occupation of Malaya and Singapore, 1941-5: link
– J Asia
16 hours ago
4
@JAsia it's the issue with Japanese romanization that ん in 憲兵隊 (けんぺいたい) can be read as either M or N...
– Andrew T.
15 hours ago
@AndrewT. And it's usually transliterated as an 'n' because that's the perdominant pronunciation in most words. Depending on the word though, there's usually one form that's 'correct', though in some cases the actual sound may be somewhere between 'n' and 'm'.
– Austin Hemmelgarn
13 hours ago
5
Which it is is largely systematic, depending on whether the following consonant is labial. But this is a stupid argument. Both written forms are used and there's no reason to chastize someone for using the form that's not the one you prefer.
– R..
12 hours ago
N is the Hepburn romanisation of ん so I think this is good for consistency with any documents using that.
– Tom Kelly
7 hours ago
|
show 1 more comment
4
It should be Kempeitai or Kempei Tai, not "Kenpeitai", i.e. M instead of N. I can see Wikipedia has it as N, but almost all official documents in English refers to this unit with an M. For instance, Government of Singapore on their experience during Japanese occupation of Malaya and Singapore, 1941-5: link
– J Asia
16 hours ago
4
@JAsia it's the issue with Japanese romanization that ん in 憲兵隊 (けんぺいたい) can be read as either M or N...
– Andrew T.
15 hours ago
@AndrewT. And it's usually transliterated as an 'n' because that's the perdominant pronunciation in most words. Depending on the word though, there's usually one form that's 'correct', though in some cases the actual sound may be somewhere between 'n' and 'm'.
– Austin Hemmelgarn
13 hours ago
5
Which it is is largely systematic, depending on whether the following consonant is labial. But this is a stupid argument. Both written forms are used and there's no reason to chastize someone for using the form that's not the one you prefer.
– R..
12 hours ago
N is the Hepburn romanisation of ん so I think this is good for consistency with any documents using that.
– Tom Kelly
7 hours ago
4
4
It should be Kempeitai or Kempei Tai, not "Kenpeitai", i.e. M instead of N. I can see Wikipedia has it as N, but almost all official documents in English refers to this unit with an M. For instance, Government of Singapore on their experience during Japanese occupation of Malaya and Singapore, 1941-5: link
– J Asia
16 hours ago
It should be Kempeitai or Kempei Tai, not "Kenpeitai", i.e. M instead of N. I can see Wikipedia has it as N, but almost all official documents in English refers to this unit with an M. For instance, Government of Singapore on their experience during Japanese occupation of Malaya and Singapore, 1941-5: link
– J Asia
16 hours ago
4
4
@JAsia it's the issue with Japanese romanization that ん in 憲兵隊 (けんぺいたい) can be read as either M or N...
– Andrew T.
15 hours ago
@JAsia it's the issue with Japanese romanization that ん in 憲兵隊 (けんぺいたい) can be read as either M or N...
– Andrew T.
15 hours ago
@AndrewT. And it's usually transliterated as an 'n' because that's the perdominant pronunciation in most words. Depending on the word though, there's usually one form that's 'correct', though in some cases the actual sound may be somewhere between 'n' and 'm'.
– Austin Hemmelgarn
13 hours ago
@AndrewT. And it's usually transliterated as an 'n' because that's the perdominant pronunciation in most words. Depending on the word though, there's usually one form that's 'correct', though in some cases the actual sound may be somewhere between 'n' and 'm'.
– Austin Hemmelgarn
13 hours ago
5
5
Which it is is largely systematic, depending on whether the following consonant is labial. But this is a stupid argument. Both written forms are used and there's no reason to chastize someone for using the form that's not the one you prefer.
– R..
12 hours ago
Which it is is largely systematic, depending on whether the following consonant is labial. But this is a stupid argument. Both written forms are used and there's no reason to chastize someone for using the form that's not the one you prefer.
– R..
12 hours ago
N is the Hepburn romanisation of ん so I think this is good for consistency with any documents using that.
– Tom Kelly
7 hours ago
N is the Hepburn romanisation of ん so I think this is good for consistency with any documents using that.
– Tom Kelly
7 hours ago
|
show 1 more comment
up vote
1
down vote
The Kenpeitai operated both at home and in the occupied territories.
answered yesterday
dtcm840
1874
New contributor
dtcm840 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
add a comment |
up vote
1
down vote
The Kenpeitai operated both at home and in the occupied territories.
answered yesterday
dtcm840
1874
New contributor
dtcm840 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
add a comment |
up vote
1
down vote
up vote
1
down vote
The Kenpeitai operated both at home and in the occupied territories.
answered yesterday
dtcm840
1874
New contributor
dtcm840 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
The Kenpeitai operated both at home and in the occupied territories.
answered yesterday
dtcm840
1874
New contributor
dtcm840 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
answered yesterday
dtcm840
1874
New contributor
dtcm840 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
answered yesterday
dtcm840
1874
answered yesterday
dtcm840
1874
1874
New contributor
dtcm840 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
New contributor
dtcm840 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
dtcm840 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
add a comment |
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to History Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Some of your past answers have not been well-received, and you're in danger of being blocked from answering.
Please pay close attention to the following guidance:
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fhistory.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f49855%2fwas-there-a-japanese-equivalent-of-the-gestapo-during-ww2%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
