Paper #2
Democratic Struggle in Prewar Japan
The first paper in this class focused on interpretive approaches to a pivotal event in modern Japanese history: The Meiji Restoration. The Restoration propelled Japan into the modern world and enabled the country to become a strong, centralized modern-state with a powerful military establishment. The second paper will deal with the nature of the economy, society and polity that was created by the changes set in motion by the Restoration. A constitutional monarchy with a functioning parliament was created and, at times, an informal two-party system of governing seemed to be evolving. But what did this mean? Did these trends signal the advent of an increasingly responsive, participatory democratic society? What were some of the limitations of these democratic trends? And what was the overall context in which these trends were appearing?
The charge for this second paper, then, is to write an essay on the subject of Japan's struggle to establish a more open, democratic social and political system during the 1890-1932 period. As McClain notes (p. 389) the 1920s yielded "Feisty tenants and disgruntled labor, intrepid feminists and radical students, seething minorities and outcasts, moga and mobo, anarchists and Communists: To many within the governing establishment, it appeared that the country was coming apart at the seams." What sort of opportunities and challenges did the 1920s present to Japan?
One could approach this topic by focusing on Henry Smith's critique of the so-called liberal Taisho democracy, and counter some of his arguments with points made by Andrew Gordon and his notion of "Imperial Democracy." And/or, one might select some events in the women's lives included in Loftus' book, Telling Lives, place them in an appropriate social, political and historical context, and reflect on what they may tell us about life during the interwar years. What do these women's individual struggles tell us about this question of Japan's evolving polity? For example, what motivated women like Oku, Sata and Fukunaga to choose to live their lives the way they did? Takai and Nishi were both working women, but how did their lives differ? Progressive, even radical ideologies held at least some appeal for all the women in Telling Lives; why do you think that was? In what way were these women "unruly subjects" who challenged the subordination of women and mounted some form of an "oppositional ideology" against it? What place was there for oppositional ideologies within the framework of the prewar kokutai?
Some Possible Avenues of Approach:
1. Drawing on the textbook, PDFs, online materials, and things we have discussed in class, you could look at the political framework established by the MEIJI CONSTITUTION and how the development of the POLITICAL PARTY MOVEMENT, culminating in the passage of the UNIVERSAL MANHOOD SUFFRAGE BILL was able to occur within this framework. What were the strengths and limitations of the political parties? How democratic was this framework? Explain how Yoshino Sakuzo's notion on Minponshugi and Minobe Tatsukichi's "Organ Theory" in constitutional law contributed to an atmosphere that enhanced liberal or democratic aspirations. As McClain points out, the Constitution allowed for "new" or "renovationist" bureaucrats--veterans of the philosophy that the people needed "shepherding" to steer them away from radical ideologies--to take some of the initialitve in policy-making away from the political parties. In the 1930s, the parties acquiesced in most things that the military and civilian bureaucrats agitated for as opposed to the 1920s when they opposed expansion of the military and denounced intervention in Chinese affairs. (424-25)
2. Or, you could focus on some cases from the women in Telling Lives and describe the social and political order against which they were reacting and making their choices. Following some of the suggestions above, how did some of these women contest the world as they found it? How can their narratives be construed as "acts of resistance" by which they can "assert their own agency"? What can we say, overall, that we can learn from the stories of these women? How did their aspirations and visions conflict with what was possible given the particularistic notions about the kokutai found in the Constitution, the Imperial Rescript on Education and the Peace Preservation Law?
3. Or, you may wish to emphasize what is going on with the economy (in order to explain the rise of factories, the union movement, strikes, etc.) and how Japan's political processes evolved during these years. Alternatively, as suggested above, how does the broader notion of "Imperial Democracy" (Andrew Gordon) address the Smith critique that Taisho Democracy was too narrow and too shallow?
Approximate length, 6-8 pp. Due date, Friday November 18.