parliament was always in a brawl

In the 1990s, Taiwan's parliament (legislative council) was always in a brawl.In Japan at that time, variety shows often featured it in a funny way.It was true that there was a scene of "I'll go that far!" which made me laugh when I watched it, but at the same time I felt angry.

At that time, Taiwan was not long after opposition parties were free to operate.They were fighting desperately in the streets and in the National Assembly to change every law that was made to perpetuate the Kuomintang dictatorship.

The brawl parliament was one sign of it (the very mechanism of parliament was unfair).There was the earnestness of those who wanted to win democracy.I was angry that the Japanese at that time looked down at them and laughed at them without knowing the circumstances.

There is certainly something funny about the combination of "parliament" and "brawl" (probably because parliament itself has theatricality).But it wasn't something to be laughed at, it was something to be "sympathetic."They were trying to build their own country from scratch.I don't want to be a person who ridicules or despises the struggles of these people.

Can we use the word "opposition to war" as a term to criticize the resistance of the people of the country being invaded?In the last few months, I have lost track of what the Japanese people called "war" and opposed after the war.To me, "opposition to war" meant "opposition to the war of aggression (of course, first of all, my own country), and I thought that was something that I should consider as a Japanese person who carried out the invasion.In Vietnam, Afghanistan, and Iraq, I never thought that there could be an idea to call on those who resist aggression to "stop the (resistance) war."

Japan has long signed a security treaty with the world's most powerful military nation, the United States, and is threatening neighboring countries with nuclear weapons under the U.S. has even a light aircraft carrier.It seems grotesque to me that such a person living in Japan can't affirm the military resistance of Ukrainians from the standpoint of Article 9 of the Constitution.They are not shooting in military uniforms as they please, but are forced to do so by aggression.If we are to criticize them, we should criticize the great powers (including Japan) who have failed to create an international society where they can avoid taking guns.If we ask them to put down their guns, I hope that the great powers will create an environment in which Russia can leave Ukraine peacefully even if they put down their guns.Despite not being able to do such a thing, he tells the victims of the ongoing invasion to "stop the war."I don't understand the "anti-war" of the Japanese anymore.