Published online by Cambridge University Press: 28 November 2008
Looking back at the path of modernization Japan has taken in the last hundred years, one finds the most serious failure to be the lack of development of democratic political theories. In our evaluations of the ‘modernization achievements’ of Japan, this is usually the focal point of disagreement between Western and Japanese scholars. Often in the name of ‘value-free’ political science, Western scholars try their best not to mix the issue of modernization with that of democratization. The failure of democracy in pre-War Japan is usually considered insignificant, though relevant, in the discussion of the success of her modernization. More often the failure is obscured by the presence of some democratic theories and movements during the Meiji and Taisho period. In contrast, Japanese scholars tend to consider modernization and democratization as inseparable. They refuse to accept the so-called ‘objective’ approach of Western scholars, not on the basis of the old Comintern formula of ‘modernization means development toward bourgeois democracy’, but because of their emphasis on the qualitative output of a political system.
This a revised edition of the paper presented by the writer at the Seventeenth Annual Meeting, Midwest Conference on Asian Affairs, 31 October to 2 November 1968. I am grateful to the staff of the Asian Library, University of British Columbia, for their generous assistance in my search for materials for this paper. I would also like to thank Professor David Wurfuel for his valuable criticism before this final draft was written.
1 See Hall, John W., ‘Changing Conceptions of Modernization of Japan’, a report on the Hakone Conference, in Jansen, Marius (ed.), Changing Japanese Attitudes Towards Modernization, Princeton University Press, N.J., 1965.Google Scholar
2 See Ward, Robert E. (ed.), Political Development in Modern Japan, Princeton University Press, N.J., 1968, pp. 8–9.Google Scholar Also John W. Hall, op. cit.
3 For example, Reischauer, E. O., Kindai Nihon no Atarashi Mikata (New Look at Modern Japan), Kodansha: Tokyo, 1965.Google Scholar
4 Tadao, Yanaihara, Kindai Nihon Shisosho, Vol. I, pp. 9–10.Google Scholar Also see Kiyoshi, Inouye, Nihon no Kindaika to Gunkoku Shugi (Japanese Modernization and Militarism), Shin Nippon Shuppan-sha: Tokyo, 1966.Google Scholar
5 I prefer to use the Japanese word Ishin instead of the usual translation of Meiji Restoration because of my arguments about the nature of the movement.
6 Smith, Thomas C., ‘Japan's Aristocratic Revolution’, Yale Review, Vol. L, (1960–1961), p. 379.Google Scholar
7 Several of the Meiroku group members held positons in the new government but few of them can be considered politically important.
8 For discussion of how the late Tokugawa and early Meiji intellectuals misunderstood the Western idea of democracy, see Saukichi, Tsuda, ‘Meiji Kempo no seiritsumade (Road Toward Meiji Condtitution)’, in his Bungaku ni arawaretaru Kokumin Shiso no Kenkyu (Studies of thought of the Nation Through Literature), Vol. 5, Iwanami: Tokyo, 1965, pp. 338–415.Google Scholar
9 Smith, Thomas C., ‘The Discontented’, Journal of Asian Studies, Vol. XXI, p. 215.Google Scholar
10 See Senkusha no shiso (Thought of the Forerunners), selected writings of the pioneers of modern Japan with introduction by Tatsuya, Naramoto, published by Tokuma Shoten, Tokyo, as Vol. II of Kindai Nihon no Meicho (Famous Works of Modern Japan), 1966.Google Scholar
11 Scalapino, Robert A., ‘Ideology and Modernization—The Japanese Case’, in Apter, D. (ed.), Ideology and Discontent, The Free Press of Glencoe, 1964, p. 103.Google Scholar
12 See Saukichi, Tsuda, Ishin Sejfu no senden seisaku (Propaganda Policy of the Ishin Government), in his collected works cited in footnote 8 above.Google Scholar
13 Nakamura Masanaho, ‘Preface to Jiyu no Ri’, quoted in Asai Kiyoshi, Nihon ni okeru shimin seishin no seiritsu: Meiji shoki Bungaku ni okeru ‘Jiyu’ ni juyo (Formation of the citizens' thought in Japan: Acceptance of the concept ‘Liberty’ in early Meiji Literature), Shiso, June 1966, p. 63. My translation and italics.
14 Lindsay, A. D., The Modern Democratic State, Oxford University Press, New Jersey, 1947, Vol. I, p. 269.Google Scholar
15 For discussion of the nature of Meiji democratic movement see: Scalapino, Robert A., Democracy and the Party Movement in Pre-War Japan, Berkeley, 1953Google Scholar; Ike, Nobutaka, The Beginnings of Political Denocracy in Japan, Baltimore, 1950Google Scholar; and also Masaaki, Kosaka (ed.), Japanese Thought in the Meiji Era (trans. by Abosch, David), Tokyo, 1958.Google Scholar
16 See Beckmann, George M., ‘Political Thought and the Meiji Oligarchs’, in Asian Cultural Studies, 3 (10 1962), I.C.U., TokyoGoogle Scholar, for a thorough discussion of the attitudes of Okubo, Ito, and Kido towards constitutionalism. The essay centers around the history of the making of the Meiji Constitution. Also see the same author, The Making of the Meiji Constitution, University of Kansas Press, 1957.Google Scholar
17 Fumimaro, Konoye, Shintaisei Seimei (Declaration of New Political System)Google Scholar, see ‘Yokusan taiseika no shiso doko (The Direction and Tendency of Thought Under the Yokusan System)’, in Saburo, Ienaga (ed.), Kindai Nihonshi Koza, Vol. I, Rekishiteki Gaikan (Historical Perspective), Chikuma Shobo: Tokyo, 1959, pp. 317–42.Google Scholar
18 For a critical re-evaluation of the Meiji Minken Undo and the validity of democratic theories presented for the movement, see Bellah, Robert N., ‘Values and Social Changes in Modern Japan’, in Asian Cultural Studies, 3 (1962), I.C.U., Tokyo.Google Scholar
19 See Sogoro, Tanaka, Yoshino Sakuzo, Miraisha: Tokyo, 1958.Google Scholar For Kijiro, Kawai, see the numerous publications by the Shakai Shiso Kenkyu Kai, Tokyo.Google ScholarSaburo's, Ienaga introductory essay in Minshu shugi (Democracy), Vol. 3, Gendai Nihon Shiso Taikei, Chikuma Shobo: Tokyo, 1965, provides an excellent overall review of the works of the democratic theorists.Google Scholar
20 Masao, Maruyama, ‘Nihon no shiso (Japanese Thought)’, in Gendai Shiso (Modern Thought), Vol. XI, Iwanami Shoten, 1957.Google Scholar
21 Kamei Katsuichiro calls this ‘Niju no yihojin-sei’. See his ‘Minzoku henbo-ki ni okeru Dento no Yimi (The Meaning of Tradition in the Days of National Transition)’, in Kindai Nihon Shiso-shi Koza, Vol. 7, Chikuma Shobo: Tokyo, 1959.Google Scholar
22 The term ‘buffer zone’ is used by Fukuda Tsuneari, to distinguish groups such as Taisho Kyo-yo Group who sought self-perfection and self-purity outside the stream of the existing social and political framework. See the volume on Han-Kindai no Shiso (Thought of Anti-Modernity) in the Chikuma series on modern thought.
23 For example, Kiyoshi, Kiyosawa, Ankoku Nikki (Diary of the Dark Age) published under the editorship of Umeda Hiroshi in 1954, Tokyo Keizai Shinpo-sha: Tokyo.Google Scholar
24 For the socialists this was caused by their historical emphasis on humanism and pacifism in Japan. The failure of the democratic movement also drove many extreme democrats into the socialist camp. For example, see the process of change of political thought in people like Kotoku Shusui, Kawakami Hajime, and Oyama Ikuo. On the part of the Communists, this was based on their definition of Japan ‘in the stage of Bourgeois democratic revolution’ which should create conditions for the following stage of proletariat revolution. Thus the Communist International repeatedly advocated the need for the Japanese Communists to use democratic slogans and to support democratic movements. In spite of the many mistakes in applying the Communist ‘formula’ to define the nature of Japanese society, Communism was the one which did pinpoint the evils of the Emperor System. See Kentaro, Yamabe (ed.), Collection of Theses on Japan by Comintern, Aoki Shoten: Tokyo, 1961.Google Scholar
25 de Schweinitz, Karl Jr., Industrialization and Democracy, The Free Press of Glencoe, 1964, p. 268.Google Scholar
26 For the concept of ‘developmental dictatorship’, see Lowenthal, Richard, ‘Government in the Developing Countries: Its Functions and Its Form’, in Ehrmann, N. W. (ed.), Democracy in a Changing Society, Praeger, 1964.Google Scholar
27 See Pennock, J. Ronald's argument that ‘the degree of political development achieved by any polity ought to be measured as much by the consequences which flow from development as by the intrinsic character of the developing system’. ‘Political Development, Political Systems, and Political Goods’, World Politics, Vol. XVIII, No. 3.Google Scholar
28 Soseki, Natsume, ‘Bunmei Kaika Hihan (Criticism on Enlightenment and Modernization)’, collected in Tsuneari, Fukuda (ed.), op. cit.Google Scholar
29 Takushima Norimitsu, drafted while attending the Keio University. The quotation was written on 18 July 1944, in his diary to be left for his family. Collected in Kindai Nihon no Meicho (Famous Works of Modern Japan), Vol. 9. Senso Taiken (The Experience of War), edited by Munemitsu, Yamada, Tokuma Shoten: Tokyo, 1966, pp. 256–7Google Scholar; my translation.
Also see Kike Wadatsumi no Koe (Collection of Writings of the students who died in World War II), Tokyo University Press, 1952.Google Scholar
30 Jansen, Marius B., ‘On Studying the Modernization of Japan’, in Asian Cultural Studies, 3, pp. 3–4.Google Scholar
31 Ibid.
32 Bellah, Robert N., op. cit., p. 51.Google Scholar
33 Apter, David, The Politics of Modernization, University of Chicago Press, 1965, p. 328.Google Scholar
34 See Schwartz, Benjamin, ‘Modernization and the Maoist Vision—Some Reflections on Chinese Communist Goals’, The China Quarterly, Vol. 21 (01–03 1965), pp. 3–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
