The literature and academia have paid widespread attention to modern Japanese conservatism. Japan’s political society tends to be considered as leaning towards the right especially after the 1990s, resulting in many studies focusing on modern Japanese conservatism and criticizing its phenomenon. Past studies, however, did not often analyze the issue from the viewpoint of political thought, and therefore, this essay aims to fill such a gap.
Conservatism has taken on an important role around the world, constituting modern political thought ever since the French Revolution, which means we should take the viewpoint of political thought in order to appreciate modern Japanese conservatism. For this reason, this study proposes an annalistic framework of liberal conservatism and national conservatism as follows: liberal conservatism is based on western conservatism, which places emphasis on thinking in conservative ways; national conservatism inherits a national way of thinking that is impacted by the West, which puts high priority on conserving Japanese-ness. The difference between the two appears clearly in evaluations about Great East Asia War and the Constitution of Japan. Thus, this study, defines liberal conservatism and national conservatism, and then analyzes the speeches and writings of modern Japanese conservatives regarding these two topics. Overall, this essay provides an important viewpoint for appreciating modern Japanese conservatism.
This article explores the linkage among territory, nationalism and domestic politics through a case study of the Preah Vihear Temple dispute between Thailand and Cambodia. In the process of transformation from traditional kingdoms to modern nation-states, territorial changes are very important for nationalism and nation-building. They can provide political elites with chances to manipulate and secure self interest. To fan the flames of nationalism, political leaders or elites often re-construct and re-write national history a..
During the Second Sino-Japanese War, a.k.a. War of Resistance (1937~1945), both China and Japan attempted to gain support from overseas Chinese using their different political discourses. The concept of “nation” was not originated in East Asia but highly propagandized during this war period. This article analyzed and compared various discourses on overseas Chinese mobilization submitted by four actors─Chiang(Choung- ching government ), Wang ( Nanking government ), Mao ( Yen-an government), and Empire Japan ─ using..
Please enter the journal title, keywords, and author-related information you want to query.