Bottom line: the stronger claims to the islets are Japan’s.

And you apparently didn’t know, or thought it beneath contempt to mention, that the recent purchase by the Japanese govt. was to prevent a planned purchase by the Tokyo Metro authority, which had hoped to make an explicit in-China’s-face “these will be Japan’s forever” point by doing so. So the govt. purchase was actually an effort to be diplomatic to China. But regardless of private ownership, the sovereignty of the land remains legally Japanese.

You also seem unaware of the plethora of evidence, coming from Chinese sources, that many of the demonstrations appear to be orchestrated by a faction of the governmnet, for “distraction” purposes. Another potful of evidence to that effect can be found here: http://www.nybooks.com/blogs/nyrblog/2012/sep/20/beijings-dangerous-game/

To use an american cliche, China basically just needs to work smarter not harder. To develop that american cliche into a Japanese manufacturing process/philosophy, one might say that China needs to cut down on the Muda.

Of course the entire Japanese economy and its exceptionalism is based upon this “smart” or “lean” manufacturing. So the purported and actual “Muda” of the Chineese is really hurting the brand, or the serviceability and functionality of parts.

In a nation that lacks the “blessing” of lawyers to diffuse ideological explanations, and pin down guilty/liable parties, there is some sense in taking your frustration out upon the indicia of Japanese supremacy. China just isn’t producing Toyota or Honda level quality.

A Chinese man severely hurt and near-death because he drove a Toyota…

This is a conflict between Muda and Li. Or basically the way in which the Japanese via Honda and Toyota, have morphed engineering and confuscianism (an exageration?, obviously it can be taught and even presidential candidate folks like Gingrich preach a version of lean manufacturing). So Muda is not exactly a religion of eliminating waste…but it is a ritual, custom, rite, etiquette, moral and process of manufacturing.

So basically the Japanese Li is different from the Chinese Li, and the Japanese have reintroduced lawyers en masse and answer all problems or half problems, at the lowest level possible before they ever give rise to “nationalistic/ideology”(or a macro-economic, cosmological explanation for that matter)

So basically this is a conflict over Li and Zhong and the problem is that true Confucianism “replaces” lawyers with a non legalistic conflict resolution process that is actually incapable of lending itself to the levels of precision that american due process or Japanese Muda process as a Li entails.

It is also not nationalism, it is Zhong… but I suppose that nationalism translates as Loyalty to a nation. The problem of course is if Zhong attaches to a sort of China as mandate of Heaven, and the Japanese component is essentially highly modern and legalistic, and thus in many ways antagonistic to generalized Loyalty, or religious…(Lawyers parse Loyalty, and duties of loyalty, and the Japanese process/Li of conquering Muda, comes down to apportioning Li(which bundles duties of Loyalty) with a fine tooth comb. Japanese Li, or Muda fighting/ quality assurance, deconstructs and eliminates the hold of unconscious or unknowning routines or habits.

It seems difficult to believe that students in China have no spirituality, but one could also argue that Confucianism is not a religion, in the Japanese context it certainly seems to be legalistically/mechanically aristotleian, or directed towards the development of proper habits.

But once you start stepping in bringing western legal catagories and products, you restructure Li, and maybe this is a pretty big deal.

So China really is seeing unprecedented changes, really no nation is so directed toward rootedness and familial piety has had to readjust Li so quickly.

So the creation of a Chinese Zhong, or of a Chinese Li/Zhong loyalty to habits and processes unique to the structure Chinese life…these seem to align well for a sort of antagonism with Japan, and the material indicia of Japanese presence and differing Li philosophy, i.e. Toyota, Honda, et al.

In some sense the Chinese resent the topiarization to western Li, and the Li or goods, which fill stores and warehouses with signs of material plenty and productivity, but which are accompanied by pictures of beauty that are western (that is tailored to the tastes of those they export to). (The more you are an export nation, the easier it is to build upon this image resentment.)

It is an economic problem understood broadly, but economic problems understood broadly are almost always bad(they become grounds for ideology), and china just doesn’t have the legal structure or lawyers to handle these problems narrowly before the resentment gets out of hand, and results in the quasi-irrationality of lashing out against Toyota owners.

I don’t think China and Japan will go to war, but “hate” crimes against Japanese indicia/Brands could occur.

Nationalism is good. It keeps people from stepping on your toes, like Japan just did when the purchased that island. If Japan believe they can provoke China and get away with it, it’s sadly mistaken. The strong Chinese response is essential, as next time Japan think about doing something similar, it will think twice.