/his, how could people go to war with one another when they both

To answer your question generally, read Machiavelli, or Han Fei.

To answer your question specifically, the emperor was a meme and everyone knew it. So fuck him and the divine wind he rode in on we gonna get ours and if some punk has to eat a naginata welp.

>>2873387
I mean, this. The emperor is great and all but for most of Japanese and Chinese history the Emperor is a paper tiger.

>>2873368
the thing about a hereditary nobility is that people are either born in a position of power or they aren't, so they don't really give much of a shit beyond not doing things that will destroy their status outright.

>>2873387
>>2873415

Neither of you are answering my question, though. I specifically said this isn't what I meant by my post. I'm not asking what the factors were that could've permitted them to do this. I know that the capital usually had little power and that the lords knew this too, but I also doubt that their explanation would be "lol the emperor's a meme, who gives a shit ayyymao." I'm asking what they WOULD say if you sat down and questioned them about what they're doing. All the examples I've found are of them either saying the current emperor is invalid for whatever reason, or that this other party has offended the capital and needs to be punished in the name of the emperor. Which is clearly bullshit in the eyes of any informed equal.

I'm sure that there was some kind of philosophical justification for what they were doing. An explanation that was rooted in more than simple misrepresentation and propaganda.

>>2873447
In the case of feudal japan? "[insert person who has things the speaker wants] insulted my le honor, daimyo-dono" *tips kabuto*
Or the alternative that works in both feudal japan and feudal anywhere, they would contrive some reason why the land they want should rightfully have gone to them by inheritance.

>>2873447
Okay, well, again to answer your question in specifics, assuming you could engage a 16th Century samurai of the Sengoku Jidai in a conversation, his response would probably be "it is not my place to question my lord's decision." If you were to pose the same question to a daimyo, he would probably say exactly what you wrote, something along the lines of "this other daimyo (who conveniently happens to have holdings beneficial to me) has acted against the will of heaven and defied the emperor's divine mandate and so I am waging war in the name of his majesty the son of heaven in order to bring the traitor to justice." If you think these people stayed up late burning the midnight oil fretting over their moral conundrums then you have seriously misjudged the character of the type of man it takes to survive as a ruler in feudal Japan.

>>2873368
In an ideal samurai world (of the time), people follow rules and respect shogun/daimyo/emperor without any conflict.

The world we live in is not ideal. Daimyo disagree with each other on which policies to implement. They disagree on family matters. They disagree on religious matter. etc

Its called human flaw. If you view the samurais as humans instead of a unique japanese snowflakes, you begin to see the bigger picture of human kind. History across culture is filled with betrayals, disagreements, etc.

>>2873447
Usually they hide behind some feudal laws, be it de facto or de jure. There's usually a ton of gray area when it comes to feudal societies. If you want a succession dispute, it's easy to find a "rightful" heir, or, if you're bold enough, you can even trace lineage back in such a way that it justifies a claim on a region. Truces and treaty violations are another potential target - as they were often written in vague terms to keep both parties happy, it'd often be easy to conjure up a casus belli from that.

And then there's land disputes - feudal domains weren't always clearly delineated, instead being zones of control in which border regions were often fluid and not fully under the control of anyone. With that kind of gray area, it'd be easy to create a casus belli.

File: H016-038.jpg (425KB, 1334x2000px) Image search: [Google]

425KB, 1334x2000px

>>2873447
Japanese reverence for the Emperor and his authority is similar to early American interpretations of the statement that "All men are created equal." (Before god.) Sure, it was an eternal, spiritual truth but the meaning is so high and unearthly that it really doesn't matter and it's applicable to day-to-day operations, but this is just a hypothesis of mine.

The Emperor of Japan has always in some part or another tried to imitate the Emperors of China, which meant creating an administrative state ruled over by Imperially appointed bureaucrats all from a heavenly a strictly designed capital from a heavenly monarch. Though it might not look it, copying the governmental structure of a huge area of land covering thousands of miles of river valleys and fertile farmland with countless cities and trading opportunities and applying that to a tiny, vertical archipelago of resource-starved Islands with almost no extensive contact with the outside, most of the land being uninhabitable due to mountains with only tiny pockets of space between the mountains and the sea being fit for settlement with a few exceptions (Kanto and Kinai) creates vastly different consequences. In that kind of situation, the country is very hard to govern and travel within, and local loyalties and authorities take much more presidence over a far away central power.

In order to understanding ANY aspect of Japanese society or history (not just this one), you need to understand the geographical limits and challenges that the Japanese faced. Many things from their feudal structure to their social etiquette can be traced back to adaptations to that environmental situation coupled with heavy Chinese influence.

File: 96010a6b5c45e1a9f195653f5be319a5.jpg (168KB, 836x854px) Image search: [Google]

168KB, 836x854px

>>2873513

>applying that to a tiny, vertical archipelago of resource-starved Islands with almost no extensive contact with the outside, most of the land being uninhabitable due to mountains with only tiny pockets of space between the mountains and the sea being fit for settlement with a few exceptions

You make it sound like classical Greece, almost.

>>2873368
Few in Japan prior to the Meiji era had a sense of loyalty to a central government. Loyalty was based on kinship ties and vertical relationships with patrons and lords. If a lord could not reward his followers he was usually killed or abandoned. The only reason the people at the top were not routinely axed is that it would be politically messy to do so.

>>2873368
In general, many historical states didn't share your presumption that peace is superior to war.
Unless there's an immediate outside threat, the absolute military readiness of the empire is irrelevant. Warfare between lords then becomes an acceptable way of settling disputes and culling the weak. An unstable and fractious empire is also less likely to gang up on the emperor in bad times.

>>2873513
So Japan is just China lite?

>>2876185
Before the Kamakura Shogunate - Yes.
Afterwards - No.