I'm not here to go dig up details for you.
This all started with you saying that it was "almost certainly pure fiction" without providing any evidence for that claim, while at the same time criticising someone for providing no evidence for the opposite view. You still haven't given your evidence for saying it's almost certainly pure fiction.
If someone said that the idea that people have walked on the moon was "almost certainly pure fiction", and that person also complained that people saying that people have walked on the moon haven't given a shred of evidence, then it'd be reasonable to ask them what their evidence was for it being almost certainly pure fiction.
Why is it almost certainly pure fiction?
For the last time: saying that a claim is pure fiction is not a claim, it is a dispute of a claim.
But you said it was almost certainly pure fiction, which is a statement that requires evidence.
Then perhaps you can provide a shred of evidence that the Japanese people in postwar Japan were "constantly exhorted" that they were superior to other asians.
> Regarding your second point, you made the positive claim that it's "almost certainly pure fiction". If you're going to make a positive claim and not provide any evidence, while criticising other people for doing the same thing, then that's ironic.
The claim that people born under the star sign Pisces are easily confused is almost certainly pure fiction. Confabulating the words "almost certainly pure fiction" into a positive claim on my part is pointless semantic game-playing.