Fascism in Japan

Imperial Japan: Fascist at Birth or a Failed Democracy?

History is often filled with misconceptions. And these misconceptions often arise from a myriad of reasons ranging from simple misnomers to gross oversimplification of various chunks in history. One of the finer examples of a historical misconception would be the dark ages. Most people, at least in the lower levels of education, are taught that the dark ages was an era of scientific backwardness and devout worship of the catholic church. If this were to be true, then the transition from the dark ages into the renaissance period would have not been possible without any precedence of scientific progression. Indeed, the term “dark ages” is a misnomer of the period that is the medieval ages and the use of this misnomer has often perpetuated the false idea that the specific time period was a hindrance in human progress. In a similar regard, the politics of Imperial Japan is also often misunderstood. Imperial Japan is sometimes regarded as a fascist empire that sought to conquer and subjugate all the peoples of East, South East, and South Asia under its banner. Although the latter part is true, the description of Imperial Japan being fascist in nature is all too simplistic and inaccurate in its interpretation. It’s also important to determine when Japan began to show fascist characteristics as it did not always portray them throughout its lifespan as an empire, as exemplified by the multiparty republic that was established during the Taisho era. In order to answer the lingering question of whether Japan truly was fascist or not, two things must be determined: the political history of Imperial Japan and the definition of fascism.

Section I Part 1: Political Developments in Meiji Japan

The Japanese empire has its roots all the way back to the time of the Meiji Restoration. The Meiji Restoration was essentially Japan’s industrialization and westernization period: they sent various leaders and advisors into the western world in order to learn and report back their methods of industrialization, adopted a mixed constitutional/absolute monarchy based off of the British and Prussian models, adopted a western style conscript based military, etc. The important part here is the adoption of a mixed constitutional/absolute monarchy system where the emperor reigned supreme power, the establishment of an executive branch in the form of a cabinet and prime minister, the adoption of a legislative branch known as the Imperial Diet, and an independent judiciary. The establishment of the Meiji Constitution set up the basis for a procedural democracy where there existed a separation of powers, civil liberties, and voting rights; however, the extent to which they were carried out were limited in nature. Although there was a separation of powers, power was actually in the hands of a group of elder councilmen known as the Genro, who were direct advisors to the emperor. There were some civil liberties, but they were limited by the government. Voting rights were given, but only to around 1.1% of the population. The Illiberal democracy of the Meiji era, however, would soon be surpassed by the more liberal democratic Taisho era.

Section I Part 2: Political Developments in Taisho Japan

The Taisho era is the historical period in Japan between 1912 and 1926. It was during this period where more moderate and democratic reforms were made and was thus known as the period of “Taisho Democracy”. However, an important question of how Taisho Democracy was established must be answered. It all began in the year 1905 after the Japanese success over the Russian Empire during the Russo-Japanese War. The unsatisfactory winning terms of the Russo-Japanese war led to public dissent as exemplified by the Hibiya incendiary incident. The combination of the later Taisho political crisis and the rice riots of 1918 further strengthened domestic Japanese populist movements and through these events ideas of universal suffrage became popular and several different political parties were created to oppose the cabinets of the old Meiji regime. Thus, the era of “Taisho Democracy” was born and a period of a more liberal democratic and multiparty republic was formed in Japan. However, as populist demand became stronger and left-wing sentiments grew stronger within the civilian populus, the government reacted by implementing the 1925 Peace Preservation Law, which effectively sought out to weaken leftist political parties from gaining power into the government. The 1925 Peace Preservation thus set up for the transformation of the Japanese government from that of a more consolidated democracy back to an authoritarian form of rule.

Section I Part 3: Political Developments in Showa Japan

The end of the Taisho period came with the Showa period, where Japan saw a period of rapid growth in militarism, authoritarianism, and ultranationalism. One of the reasons for this growth in these areas can be explained by Japan’s exit out of the League of Nations. After its invasion of Manchuria had been condemned as an act of imperialism, and therefore in violation with membership requirements for the League of Nations, Japan was kicked out of the League of Nations. This left Japan with effectively no allies and so early 1930’s Japan began an exponential growth of right-wing sentiments in Japan as their isolation began to grow into racial prejudices and xenophobia against other nations. With this set in motion, a military oligarchy had begun to form and this left Japan ruled under military admirals between 1932 - 1936. The Japanese government ensured every man, woman, and child would be indoctrinated under the state’s new form of propaganda: Bushido. They utilized a romanticized version of the old samurai code to instil a sense of honor and duty for the emperor to further strengthen national unity and their growing military state. A sense of racial superiority over other races also started to develop due to the rise in right-wing militarism and used the idea of a pan Asian state known as the “Greater East Asia Co-Prosperity Sphere” as justification for their colonial expansion. However, as illiberal as it may be, Japan still had remnants of democracy left in it. Fumimaro Konoe, for example, was appointed as the prime minister by the privy council in 1937 through a somewhat parliamentary system. It was only during 1940 when Japan adopted the “Imperial Rule Assistance Association” (大政翼贊會/大政翼賛会: Taisei Yokusankai) when Japan finally adopted a one-party state over its country and began the nationalization of various industries in order to support the idea of Hakkou Ichiu (meaning unify all eight corners of the world under one roof), which further boosted militarism and popular support for their current war against China. The Imperial Rule Assistance Association ruled over Japan until the end of the second world war.

Section II: What is Fascism?

The definition of fascism has been a hotly debated topic between political scientists and historians alike. This might bring some confusion to the casual viewer who might think that fascism is nothing more than an authoritarian state based on the values of racial prejudice and imperialism, just like Hitler’s Germany. And while those are certainly characteristics of a fascist state, those are not the only defining characteristics. For example, the values of authoritarianism, imperialism, and racial prejudices are perfect traits that describe Joseph Stalin, leader of the USSR. He ruled with an iron fist, was vehemently racist against Jews and Poles alike, and exerted the USSR’s influence either through the annexation or exertion of indirect influence, otherwise known as setting up a puppet state, over its various eastern European neighbors. And yet, we know that the USSR was not fascist, but communist: an ideology that is on the complete opposite political spectrum to that of fascism. And so this again raises the question of what fascism actually is. In order to better define the term, Umberto Eco’s “Ur-Fascism” and his 14 points of fascism will be defined and utilized. Eco was an Italian philosopher and writer who grew up in Mussolini’s fascist Italy, and so he has first hand experience on what fascism is like in the country where it originated from. Keep in mind that even Eco’s definition of fascism is still somewhat flawed, but it is a good enough guideline nonetheless.

Umberto Eco’s 14 Points of Fascism:

1. The Cult of Tradition

2. The Rejection of Modernism

3. The Cult of Action for Action’s Sake (Anti-Intelligentsia)

4. Disagreement is Treason

5. Fear of Difference (Rejection of diversity)

6. Appeal to Social Frustration

7. The Obsession with a Plot

8. The Enemy is both Strong and Weak

9. Pacifism is Trafficking with the Enemy

10. Contempt for the Weak

11. Everybody is Educated to become a Hero

12. Machismo and Weaponry (Disdain for women and homosexuality)

13. Selective Populism

14. Newspeak (Reference to Orwell’s book “1984” where a fictional language called “Newspeak” based on limited vocabulary and and grammar to limit individual thinking and any semblance of individualism)

The question now is a matter of how many points does Imperial Japan align with Eco’s 14 points?

Section III: Imperial Japan and Eco

1. Imperial Japan was pretty much traditionalist in every part of the word and throughout a significant portion of their lifespan. Their views on women and children were very much confucian in nature and the only time where they started to wane away from this mode of thinking would have been either during the era of Taisho Democracy or Japan’s post war period. Even still, filial piety and the Bushido code perpetuated and consolidated Japanese traditionalism in its entirety.

2. Later Japanese military statism strongly opposed modern values of a liberal democracy and individualism, and so yes 1940’s Japan would strongly fit with this characteristic. The perception, however, would be different if we were to look at it from a 1920’s Japan perspective during the era of Taisho Democracy where individualism and liberal democracy flowed more freely.

3. This is similar to point 2 and revolves around the idea of rejecting modern enlightenment thoughts of liberalism, democracy, and individualism. This is targeted specifically towards the scholars of those philosophies, and so in this regard, yes Japan was very much anti-intelligentsia during the 1940’s. Again, just like in the second point, the perspective changes when it comes to 1920’s Japan where liberal democracy flourished. During that time period, this point would not be applicable.

4. The idea here is that thinking against the traditionalist values of the state is a crime in it of itself. Just like points 2 and 3, this most definitely applies to Japan’s vehement disapproval of the idea of liberalism and individualism as those are modernist values, which contrast with that of traditionalist values. This is, again, however perceived differently if taken to the era of Taisho Japan where the multiparty republic encouraged modernist values for a time.

5. Japan was most definitely racist against other non-Japanese. These ideals are exemplified by their vehement racist attitudes towards other Asians such as Koreans, Chinese, Filipinos, and all other peoples that came under their conquest and treating them as either third class citizens or even sub-human, such as the case for the Chinese as exemplified by events such as the Rape of Nanking or Unit 731. The sense of racial superiority was most likely fueled by rising levels of ultranationalism in the country with the romanticization of perversion ideas such as Yamato-damashii, a Japanese term used to describe the characteristics and culture of the Japanese people. The only difference between Japan and a country such as Germany would be that they weren’t as explicit in their ideas of racial prejudice. Ideas such as Hakkou Ichiu and the “Greater East Asia Co-Prosperity Sphere” are under the guise of a pan-Asian state, but in reality, it was to achieve Japanese racial dominance and influence over Asia.

6. Japan wasn’t affected by the Great Depression as much as other fascist countries such as Germany or Italy to the point where the wealth inequalities became a widespread problem for the masses and were used to gain support for a party or movement. The fragmentation of society was more affected by external foreign elements such as liberalism and democracy.

7. There was no point in time where they thought that their enemies, such as China or the west, were coming to get them in a big international plot to overthrow the Japanese government. Anti-western thought was prevalent at the time, but not to the point of conspiracy against the Japanese state.

8. The idea of both a strong and weak enemy is an idea that’s been used by propagandists throughout the modern time period, and so this idea really isn’t all that unique to fascism. However, this means that this point does indeed apply to Imperial Japan as propagandists would often portray the west and their biggest enemy, China, as being both inferior races and yet at the same time vile strong monsters that must be endured against and vanquished.

9. Not really. Japan was willing to go against China because they saw them as an enemy that was weakened by years of civil war and political and military corruption. And they were willing to conquer territories such as Korea, Taiwan, the Philippines, and Malaya, Indonesia, Indochina, Australia, and India as they were all perceived to be weaker foes that could be brought under the banner of the rising run. However, Japan was hesitant when it came to the idea of declaring war against the US, an industrially and militarily stronger foe, and only did so due to their necessity of securing the rich raw materials in South and Southeast Asia without US interference (as evidenced by their attack on Pearl Harbor and attempt to cripple the US navy).

10. Japan’s strict hierarchical system most definitely fits this characteristic, as reflected in point 5. The Japanese military oligarchy would be at the top and anyone who subscribes to Japanese ultranationalist confirmative thought be next in line. Next would be any moderate thinking people, but since they’re still technically Japanese, they would be higher on the list than ethnic minorities such as Korean or Chinese. The social ladder would continue to extend downwards and each step of the way, the people at the higher part of the social ladder would express disdain towards those who are lower than them, thus instilling a sense of contempt for the weak. This was often seen in places such as the military where Japanese officers would beat their lower ranked soldiers, and those soldiers would then beat even lower ranking soldiers due to their perceived sense of superiority to a group of people so they can vent their frustrations, and then those soldiers would beat conscripts, whom were ethnic minorities, as they perceived them as a lower group of people they showed disdain for in order to vent their frustrations, such as Koreans or Chinese, and etc.

11. The romanticization and perversion of the Bushido code spread among the Japanese masses, and thus warfare also became romanticized and sought after. It promoted the idea that any and all Japanese soldiers would die as heroes to their emperor and with honor as long as it was on the battlegrounds. Death on the battlefield was often so romanticized and so in this regard, Japan does fit this characteristic.

12. As is their traditionalist values, homosexuality and the empowerment of women were seen as modernist thinking and were therefore banned in the late 1930’s and early 1940’s. Although homosexuality was still rejected, women’s rights were still a floating idea, however, during Taisho Democracy due to the explosion of modernist and leftist thought at the time.

13. Imperial Japan’s legitimacy stemmed less from the collective ethos from the masses; rather, they drew their right to rule from Shinto, their state religion. The masses only added to the legitimacy after seeing the state’s divine right to rule.

14. Yes, as the masses were taught to be a collective rather than form individual thought processes. This was done in order to strengthen Japanese national unity and make it easier to manipulate the masses.

Section IV: Conclusion

According to my analysis, Imperial Japan hit 10 out of the 14 marks that Eco described to be the main points that displayed fascism. However, this does not mean Japan was fascist throughout its lifespan as a nation. If you were to take Japan back into the 1920’s during its era of Taisho Democracy, over half of points that were originally ascribed to Japan could be removed due to the support of modernist and leftist ideals at the time. And so, Japan certainly displayed fascist characteristics over its existence; however, there were certain periods in time where they displayed more fascist characteristics than others. In this regard, Japan’s political character can be described in two ways depending on the time periods. During the 1920’s, Japan was emerging to become a more multiparty republic, but still had some traditionalist setbacks due to the rise of reactionaries. And during the late 1930’s and late 1940’s, Japan was pretty much fascist in almost every respect, at least according to Eco.

Citations:

Carr, Michael. "Yamato-Damashii 'Japanese Spirit' Definitions". International Journal of

Lexicography, 7(4):279–306 (1994)

Chang, Iris. The Rape of Nanking: the Forgotten Holocaust of World War II. Basic Books, a Member of the Perseus Books Group, 2015.

Dower, John W. War without Mercy: Race and Power in the Pacific War. Pantheon Books, 2014.

Duus, Peter. The Rise of Modern Japan. Houghton Mifflin, 1976.

Eco, Umberto. “UR-FASCISM.” New York Review of Books, 22 July 1995.

Gordon, Andrew. A Modern History of Japan: from Tokugawa Times to the Present. Oxford University Press., 2003.

Harootunian, Harry D. Overcome by Modernity: History, Culture, and Community in Interwar Japan. Princeton University Press, 2002.

Hoffman, Michael. “'Taisho Democracy' Pays the Ultimate Price.” The Japan Times, 29 July 2012, www.japantimes.co.jp/life/2012/07/29/general/taisho-democracy-pays-the-ultimate-price/.

Lindberg, David C., and Ronald L. Numbers. When Science and Christianity Meet. University of Chicago Press, 2008.

“Meiji.” Encyclopædia Britannica, Encyclopædia Britannica, Inc., 20 July 1998, www.britannica.com/biography/Meiji.

Oda, Hiroshi. Japanese Law. Oxford University Press, 2012.

Shinobu Seizaburō. Taishō demokurashīshi. Nihon hyōron Sha, 1978.

Tansman, Alan M. The Culture of Japanese Fascism. Duke University Press, 2009.

“Umberto Eco (Author of The Name of the Rose).” Goodreads, Goodreads, www.goodreads.com/author/show/1730.Umberto_Eco.

Wolferen, Karel van. The Enigma of Japanese Power People and Politics in a Stateless Nation. Charles E. Tuttle Company, 1993.