Democracy's alien presence in Japan

U.S. Culture / Democracy's alien presence in Japan : The Language Connection : Features : DAILY YOMIURI ONLINE (The Daily Yomiuri):

The Language Connection

It's a shame that this is going to be Kimiko's last article. I really enjoyed her writings over the course of this past year...

A year has passed since I began to write this column. After much thought I have decided to stop writing due to my busy schedule. I would like to thank The Daily Yomiuri for giving me the opportunity to express my ideas, and also the readers for writing to me with their thoughts. It was interesting to hear various different opinions, and I apologize to the many to whom I could not reply.

I would like to devote the last column to some of the questions that readers have raised.

A few seemed to be offended by my suggestion that traditional Japanese morals stem from the individual's pride, honor and discipline, and my belief that such morals are imperilled in today's Japanese society.

In my view, the Japanese historical value system was diluted with the conclusion of World War II and the importation of democracy. Traditional values based on individual pride, honor and discipline were lost. I wrote the following in my column of Jan. 24.

"Despite 60 years of democracy following the conclusion of the World War II, the Japanese are still unable to digest the concept of individualism and freedom. In addition, the Japanese have abandoned attempts to convey to the next generation the historical value system that stresses pride, honor and discipline. Today's Japanese, having lost their emotional compass, have become unable to distinguish the difference between good and evil (right and wrong), which is why I think we have seen a rise in corporate scandals and crimes in recent years."

After the war, when democracy was suddenly imposed upon the Japanese, they did not have the foundation to understand it. Many misunderstood what "freedom" meant. It took centuries for Americans to build the democracy that they have today. In contrast, Japanese society was based on morals and values that existed long before democracy arrived in the country.

It is easy to build something new where there is nothing, but it is hard to build on top of something different that already exists. It seems to me that the current problems in Japanese society come from the building of "democracy" on top of an existing base of "traditional values and morals," and to some extent, both are falling apart.

Unlike the United States, which built its democracy over many centuries, Japan had no knowledge of it when it suddenly became the political system. However, I am not saying that Japan should not be a democratic nation, simply that democracy has to come with a strong sense of law, accompanied by law enforcement. It seems to me that things are rather black and white in a democracy, which isn't surprising as it originated with the ancient Greeks, who had a clearly defined sense of "right" and "wrong."

In Japan, however, there seems to be a wider range of gray that acts as a lubricant in defusing problems between two factions. The common term "Shoganai"--"It can't be helped"--can be seen as an example of such lubrication. The way that the masses think, eat and socialize cannot be changed overnight.

Another reader asserted that it was the post-war Japanese Constitution that introduced the separation of state and religion in Japanese society. To me, this isn't necessarily so.

In Japanese history, there have been powerful religious leaders who tried to assert their power. One notable example was crushed between 1568 and 1580 by daimyo Oda Nobunaga, who was the first of the three unifiers of Japan in the Warring States period. During the Edo period (1603-1867), the Buddhist temple was part of the administration for the shogunate government, and some religious leaders no doubt benefited from this arrangement. But during the numerous shogunate governments, religion was not really a central force in politics--Japanese history is almost entirely free from wars over religion. Unlike Western history, religious wars were relatively rare in East Asia.

According to sociologists, people have a tendency to yearn for two things. The first is lumped together as power and money, and the second is the divine. However, dictators can try to combine the two yearnings. Throughout history in many parts of the world, conquerors have tried to give themselves legitimacy by becoming a king and/or claiming divine origins. Interestingly, in Japan, this was not the case. Those who have seized power usually did not try to acquire some sort of divine status; this remained with the Imperial family, who were, for the most part, powerless throughout history.

Thus there was always a separation between "church" (the divinity of the Imperial family) and "state" (the shogunate government). The Meiji Restoration is so named because it "returned" power to the Imperial family, and was based on European models of monarchy. Thus, it was the importation of European ideas that brought about the mingling of church and state in Japan. In any case, to me, this historical separation indicates that traditional Japanese values and morals do not necessarily have their origins in religion.

As a Japanese person who grew up in Japan, living in the United States taught me that values there seem to exist in a completely different dimension. For Japanese, the striking difference is the way the needs of the individual are put before the needs of the group or common good. When Japanese people go abroad and say that they feel "free" they aren't talking about a lack of individual rights in Japan, but the freedom from always worrying about how others perceive them. In this way, the concept of "freedom" for Japanese people and Westerners is different. Historically, Japanese who only knew group society may not necessarily have sought "individual freedom" in the Western sense.

When I first came to the United States, I was surprised by labor relations--particularly how the employer-employee relationship seems to be adversarial. In Japanese companies, employees traditionally were seen as an extended family. The goal for the company was to be profitable enough for all employees to make a living, and the company wasn't always run for the benefit of the stockholder. It seems to me that this was a natural outgrowth of a group-oriented society. Both the management and the union seemed to understand that they are mutually dependent. From the perspective of a Westerner, then, it might seem Japanese unions lack bite.

When I was caught between the good and bad of both cultures, one I was born in and the other I was adapted to, I thought that perhaps one might be happier not knowing another culture and to be simply satisfied with the culture one was born in. Ignorance is bliss, as they say.

However, I came to realize that to take this position would ultimately make me guilty of the ethnocentrism that is at the root of so many of the world's problems. To the contrary, this age of globalization makes it more necessary than ever to engage with other cultures.

Thank you for your interest in my column.


Manes resides in Philadelphia and teaches Japanese at Bucks and Montgomery county community colleges. She is the author of "Culture Shock of Mind." (Sunmark Publishing Company; in Japanese). maneskim@gmail.com.

(Apr. 18, 2006)