Fukoku kyohei The controversial issue of Japanese militarism is presented and detailed in my article published Nipponico.com site. Many aspects are highlighted and ignored and neglected the issue under study contained an unusual point of view that contradicts the usual identification of Japanese militarism with the tradition of bushido and the samurai caste.
article published by Christian Martorella Nipponico.com site. The article is in the dictionary under the heading of the site Nipponico.com Fukoku kyouhei.
Fukoku kyohei
Militarism, colonialism and the free market of Christian Martorella
June 19, 2005. The expression Fukoku Kyohei (rich country and strong army) was the slogan used in the Meiji era (1868-1912) that best describes militarism (gunkokushugi) that permeates modern Japan until the mid-twentieth century. Argument is often spoken lightly falling in the usual way working current instrumental ideology, without understanding what are the motivations for the protagonists of the story. So you need to do some 'clarity even at the cost of being unconventional and controversial. Above will be the comparative historical method (1) to allow us to analyze adverse events liberating vision of ideology. Do not forget that the historic Noro Eitaro (1900-1934) in his History of the development of Japanese Capitalism (Nihon shihonshugi hattatsushi) the first to demonstrate the validity of the method comparative applied to Japanese history (2).
The purpose of our analysis will therefore sull'esplicazione the relationship between militarism and the free market, highlighting the following points:
1) Difference between the modern capitalist militarism and militarism aristocratic feudal
2) rural origins of the extreme right Japanese and weakness of the liberal bourgeoisie;
3) Japanese imitation of Western military and colonial model;
4) Persistence of military types "rich country and strong army" in the democracies of the twenty-first century.
The distinction between samurai warriors, aristocrats and commoners of the national army conscription, it is clearly showing some crucial events of history. The conscription for the army began in 1873, and was only one of the steps in a process of great change in the Japanese social structure. The samurai were the best officials for centuries of feudal Japan. In addition to being skilled warriors, were prepared in literature and art, making it an excellent tool until it appeared the administration with an emphasis on the declining power of the shogun. The feudal Japan clashed with the Western colonialist nations, showing the impossibility of competing with the modern industrial organization, and above all with the bureaucratic structure of the nationalist capitalist states of the nineteenth century. Japan was an efficient feudal empire of the East, but this was not enough to equal a confrontation with the West until the military force had become a modern capitalist state. On the other hand was the military that ensured the penetration of Western trade in the colonies, ensuring the existence of a free market imposed by the use of arms (3). The conscription was only a step in the transformation of Japan. But the samurai, and scaled excluded in the new company, rebelled against the obvious disadvantage that deprived them of rights and privileges of the aristocratic caste, from right to wear two swords in public symbol of the warrior. Already in 1874 there was a Saga an uprising led by Eto Shinpei (1834-1874) stifled by the government. In 1876, the rebellion of the samurai was to Kumamoto. Shortly after the revolt broke out in Kagoshima, where fifteen thousand samurai fought with forty thousand peasants enlisted by the government and well equipped. The rebel leader was Saigo Takamori (1827-1877), a former minister who resigned in protest and valiant warrior. But the samurai had become obsolete both technically and politically, and could not resist the advance of reforms propelled the coupling industry and capital. On September 24, 1877, Saigo Takamori was defeated and lost his life in the last decisive battle for the samurai.
The clash between samurai and army conscripts had as a consequence, the social demands of a mass of commoners who were far removed from the Enlightenment ideas of equality, brotherhood and freedom, concepts accepted only by the educated middle classes and some aristocrats and intellectuals (4). These sections of the populace fueled the formation of an extremist right in the name of patriotism advocated the use of violence to impose its authoritarian government. A first successful attempt that led to entry into the armed forces, then the government's control by the army. The formation of armed forces made up of peasants was a process that drew a spontaneous movement. The peasants had made real armies hostile to the government of the shogun, the bakufu, and their revolt had weakened the military power of the Tokugawa, until the final collapse in 1867. The conscription of 1973 integrated the farmers in the new company, but they involve serious imbalances. Basically, the new state was born through a massive militarization, to the detriment of the forces propelling the economy as healthy and merchants (chonin). Meanwhile, the discontent of the samurai was appeased by placing them in appearing as a bureaucratic government officials, local administrators, police officers, school staff and faculty and administration. Roles played zealously by the undoubted preparation.
The Meiji government, concerned about the threat of riots, attempted to avoid at all costs, class conflict, thus generating a dangerous situation ignored by all, or the militarization of society. Industry also developed in this direction, emphasizing heavy industry serves the development of war. These imbalances were amplified by the weakness of the Japanese middle class. The development of the country has aimed at military power, otherwise lacked a middle class intellectual who supported the enrichment of the country for the welfare of the citizens. There were many exceptions, but it was brilliant ideas from intellectuals who rarely dragged the consent of the masses. And they were themselves to denounce the dangers of conformism of public opinion. The slogan Fukoku Kyohei (rich country and strong army) was thus interpreted as a rich country for a strong military, what the critically-General of the crowds. Despite the use of the peasant masses, the army was very far from having a slightest democratic aspect being still dominated by personal interests. Yamagata Aritomo the fief of Choshu took command of the Imperial Guard since 1872, thereby establishing the supremacy of his dominion over the army until the early twentieth century. Yamagata Aritomo was also the creator of an order which suppressed any democratic activity in the army and imposed a strict reactionary policy. Ironically it was formed without an army composed of aristocrats and commoners ideals hostile to democracy, it also took place in a formally democratic country with laws and liberal institutions. Unfortunately, such a process was not anything special, but he had as a model of the Western colonial powers. Meanwhile, the armies of Western liberal democracies have never had any democratic system, setting up the obvious contradiction of a hierarchical authoritarian political systems in electoral representation. The contradiction is still ignored, even when the armed forces of democracies are guilty of war crimes, always described as rare exceptions, neither in reality nor rare exceptions.
The structure of the Japanese Army became extremely dangerous when he began to review the policy and pay the economic alliance with the cracks (zaibatsu). The combination of free trade and militarism is not so unusual when you consider the economies of the Western colonial powers. Japanese militarism is no exception, but the pursuit of a rule, the rule expressed by the slogan rich country and strong army.
The phenomenon of the political and paramilitary soldiers is typical of the first half of the twentieth century, and can be framed by the term fashizumu (fascism) is also widely used by Maruyama Masao. Although it is still controversial definition of "Japanese fascism" because it lacked a single party and there were other characteristics, it can be agreed on what is meant to define (5). How fascist military means organizations which practiced armed violence, including the murder of political opponents and the coup, with the purpose of controlling the country and strengthen their way of distorted ideology of imperialism (kodo). These military formations originated in the countryside still rooted in values \u200b\u200band reactionary antiprogressista, in every way hostile to liberal values. For the masses of peasants, the dialectic of democratic institutions was a social and political degeneration. They did not accept the liberal principles and the guarantee of rights, calling Instead the principle of authority, respect for hierarchies and the use of force. There were several supporters of the authoritarian turn that attempted to theorize what the tumultuous events claimed. Ryohei Uchida (1874-1937) argued that the borders of Japan were to be extended to the Amur River in China, and founded the Kokuryukai (Black Dragon Society). Another leader was ultranationalist Toyama Mitsuru (1855-1944), a proponent of the rule of Asia under the leadership of Japan (Japanese pan-Asian) and organizer of numerous political attacks. Surely the first and fiercest of the theoretical extreme nationalism Japanese was Kita Ikki (1883-1937) argued that the elimination of the parliament, the abolition of the constitution, the establishment of an economy against popular zaibatsu and estates, and occupation of China. Kita Ikki was implicated in an attempted coup and was executed by its imperial authority that he supported instrumentally.
On May 15, 1932 Prime Minister Inumai Tsuyoshi was assassinated by a group of army officers and navy ending last government supported by the parties without military influences. On February 26, 1936 rose twenty-two young army officers and navy men at the helm of 1400 that killed some prominent politicians, including Finance Minister Korekiyo Admiral Saito Makoto Takahashi, and occupied several buildings. In the name of an alleged imperial authority, they called for a renewal of the country and the absolute loyalty to the emperor. It was the Emperor Hirohito to crush the uprising by sending the army against the rebels. But the situation was compromised, and the justification of law and order the army eliminated all opposition. Emperor Hirohito was so hostage to the militarist policy, and even if moderate leaders and leaned against the war, as Fumimaro Konoe, failed to strongly oppose the madness of the government headed by General Hideki Tojo as.
The military were outside the control of the institutions and took independent initiatives which then dragged the country into the abyss dark (kurai Tanima). It is clear that those who had to defend the institution was instead demolished. Also in the military confrontation was exacerbated because on one hand the Navy (Kaigun) inspired the English model, he does not agree with the military objectives (winning the war with China and the United States), the other even within Army who was opposed to the views retrograde was considered an opponent to be deleted.
This complex situation is even more complex when one considers that the framework is dynamically. Japanese militarism was fueled by the movement of rural (nohonshugi) campaign which provided the ideology and men, the army found the structure and the institution that allowed the penetration of politics, but the material support was provided by business groups (zaibatsu) that the war could be found through a commercial outlet for war production. Capitalism and rural mated with common interest to create new markets through the use of military force, so as to perpetuate the family model beyond national borders. It is therefore appropriate expression that defines the great pan-Asian family (daitoa kyoeiken), the area of \u200b\u200bcommon prosperity, even if distorted, absurd and illiberal. But today was not driven out the idea of \u200b\u200bcreating a political model only through the use of military force and the expansion of the market economy. After the end of fascism and socialism seems to be frustrating the unique model of capitalist democracy as the dominant model, because of globalization in the form reappears the militarism that had allied with capitalism. With the justification of fighting terrorism, are no longer the need to support the fascist use of military force to ensure the social order, but democratic governments. A defeat which destroys centuries of struggle for civil rights.
Notes 1. The comparative method applied to the historical and social sciences is extremely effective but it is difficult to include in its scope and depth. Distinguished historians such as Otto Hintze, Karl Lamprecht, Max Weber and Wilhelm Roscher, made extensive use of the comparative method. In the academic importance of the writer has had the teaching of Joseph Di Costanzo, student notes from the authors at the University Federico II of Naples.
2. Noro Eitaro always said that we must consider the inevitability (hitsuzen) history, rather than the occasional (guzen). The story is a story that you can interpret whatever you want, but a connection to the facts.
3. Emblematic cases of India and China subdued by the strength of the most powerful liberal economy in the world. Britain, the cradle of the Industrial Revolution and an advocate of free markets, was also the largest colonial empire of the nineteenth century, extending its dominion and control of commercial traffic on the entire planet. British troops and gunboats protect both the economic and political interests often coincide. It was for commercial reasons that broke the Opium War (1840-1842). In fact it was imposed on China to import opium produced from British colonies in Central Asia. The refusal led to the bombardment of Nanking, the blockade of Canton and the acquisition of Hong Kong through a contract, in addition to paying cash compensation to war. See Herbert Franke and Rolf Trauzettel, Feltrinelli Universal History, The Empire of China, Vol.19, Feltrinelli, Milano, 1969.
4. Among the samurai and liberal supporters of the Enlightenment ideas stands the figure of Fukuzawa Yukichi (1834-1901), author of Encouragement to know (Gakumon no Susume) is the condition of the West (Seiyo Jijo).
5. The debate on Japanese fascism (fashizumu rons) is still alive, even going back to the dispute between the school and the school Koza Rono, linked to the Socialists and Yamakawa Hitoshi Inomata Tsunao.
Bibliography
Arena, Leonardo Vittorio, Samurai, Arnoldo Mondadori, Milan, 2002.
Barzini, Luigi, Japan in arms, Treves, Milan, 1906.
Halliday, Jon, History of contemporary Japan. The politics of Japanese capitalism since 1850. Einaudi, Torino, 1979.
Martorella, Christ, the concept of the Japanese economy: methodological and sociological implications. Proceedings of the XXV Congress of Studies on Japan, Paper Publishing Veneziana, Venezia, 2002.
Maruyama, Masao, The roots of the expansion. Ideologies of modern Japan, Edizioni della Fondazione Giovanni Agnelli, Torino, 1990.
Vincentiis De Positano, Fiammetta, cruisers for the Rising Sun, De Ferrari, Genova, 2005.
Takeshita, Toshiaki, Japan and its culture: a historical, Clueb, Bologna, 1996.
Yanagi, Chitoshi, Transition from military to bourgeois society, in "Oriens", 1, vol.8, 1955.
Benefits, Adriano, Japan 1853-1905: From the end of isolation to the role of great power, Lassa-Scales, Genova, 1984.
thought 
