Fear of Massive Change

It’s no secret that the West and it staunch economic allies, like Japan, are facing growth “in others” that is threatening to transfer economic power of these mega-incumbents to the rising wealth being generated in oil and mineral rich, technologically advanced Russia, manufacturing heavy-weight China, and possibly even nations like Brazil, India and even tiny (in terms of population) Australia and Canada. While the U.S. is producing more fossil fuels, relying less on imports, the number of new hard U.S. patents is falling as those in China rise, our educational standards are deteriorating rapidly as basic educational standards in places like Shanghai and Singapore rise to the top, our trade imbalance is still against us and our deficit is rising.

For once glorious nations facing the prospect of moving to second class (or worse) global economic power – which has a direct and immediate impact on political influence – some go gracefully and adapt (like England) while others revel in the myth and mystique of older values and powerful, often military traditions. The response to economic crumbling – in Japan it was the denial of access to regional oil and in Germany it was the crush of the burdens of “reparations” imposed by the West after World War I – is often a “return” to such traditional values, backed by a prioritization of military power. World War II is a clear example of a response to these pressures. Nazis extolled Teutonic purity and power, while the embrace of military power by a chosen people emboldened Japan to choose a violent path of reassertion.

The rise of the American religious right – resisting immigration primarily by non-whites regardless of their educational abilities, praising gun ownership and fundamentalist religious values from an earlier era, vowing to cut support for the poor and weak as unnecessary burdens for the rest while embracing the supporting the largest and most powerful military force on earth – is a fairly typical response to the underlying fear of losing what was assumed to be permanent global superiority. History repeats itself, and no matter how we think we are different, we are proving that modernity does not change such ancient reactions we describe as human nature. That history has shown these desperate acts only serve to accelerate the worst fears-into-reality is hardly a deterrent to a society that simply refuses to study, much less learn from, historical precedents. We want to go back to golden times, by force if necessary.

The little signs of a right wing government in Japan are equally significant. The tough stand against a superior military foe (China) over some unpopulated islands, the visit by Prime Minister Shinzo Abe (pictured above) to a shrine dedicated to military heroes that many in the world view as monsters and war criminals who perpetrated murder, torture, ruthless conquest and forced slavery (including sexual), and now the rewriting of textbooks to whitewash some of these atrocities are examples that when aggregated suggest the rise of the traditionalist right in this small but populace country.

While there are some hopeful signs that Japan is establishing some economic stability, the last solid performance from the Japanese economy occurred in 1991. The humiliation of the Fukushima nuclear meltdown didn’t help the nation’s economy or her self-image. Japan’s famed manufacturing labor force, educated and skilled, is still too expensive to compete with the rising Asian Tigers. Japan seeks to recover that national power, perhaps even restoring a military that was pledged to remain only a moderate defense force after WWII, and is veering heavily rightwards towards the traditional values that allowed it to challenge the world beginning more than a century ago.

Teaching children “patriotism” is the mantra under which historical textbooks are being altered.”[L]iberals warn that they could undercut an antiwar message they say has helped keep Japan peaceful for decades… ‘Prime Minister Abe is feeling the heat from his political base, which feels betrayed that he has not pursued a more strongly right-wing agenda,’ said Nobuyoshi Takashima, a professor emeritus at the University of the Ryukyus in Okinawa who has studied the politics of textbooks. ‘Classrooms are one place where he can appease ultraconservatives by taking a more firmly nationalist stance.’

“Mr. Abe and the nationalists have long argued that changes in the education system are crucial to restoring the country’s sense of self, eroded over decades when children were taught what they call an overly negative view of Japan’s wartime behavior.” New York Times, December 28^th. Political conservatives have long argued that the “taken for granted” Japanese atrocities of pre-WWII and the war itself – ranging from the forced use of Korean “comfort women” as sexual servants to the Japanese military to the infamous rape, massacre and plunder of Nanking, China in 1937 – have been grossly exaggerated in foreign history books. Their mission is to install a more “balanced picture” of these “disputed” historical facts. But by denying the horribles, the Japanese government takes away one of the greatest motivations to contain Japan’s military simply as a defensive force.

Still, Japan eyes the growth of economic, political and military power in China – which still “remembers” Japan’s cruelty in the above-noted era as if it were yesterday – as a direct and immediate threat to Japan at every level. Seeing that the weakened United States, its protector, is deeply in debt to China and relies on China for so many manufactured products, Japan is making moves to be able to protect itself and perhaps recapture some of the glory that made the Land of the Rising Sun one of the most powerful nations on earth in the early twentieth century.

Enforcing a new pride is the beginning of creating a political platform to justify military expansion. Changing the textbooks is a path to foment a new Japan at the grassroots level. “The suggested changes follow years of nationalist attempts — long backed by Mr. Abe — to whittle away at negative depictions of Japan’s wartime activities. Those who oppose textbook revisions say they are beginning to see the contours of a new strategy: forcing change at the local level that has sometimes failed at the national level.

“Taketomi, a township of eight tiny islands that had been best known for its water-buffalo-drawn carts and placid coral lagoons, appears to have become ground zero for that battle… The trouble began two years ago, when a newly elected conservative mayor on the neighboring island of Ishigaki appointed a new head of a local education district who selected a ninth-grade social studies textbook published by a right-wing company. Taketomi, whose school system is part of that district, immediately rejected the book for what its teachers called overly revisionist content, including the portrayal of the antiwar Constitution as an alien document imposed by Allied occupiers who wanted to keep Japan weak… Replacing the postwar Constitution has been a career-long goal of Mr. Abe’s.

“Taketomi’s school board voted that its ninth graders, who this year number 32, would keep using the current text, which praises the Constitution and the pacifist message that it enshrines…At first, the national government ignored the quiet insurrection. But since Mr. Abe’s conservative Liberal Democratic Party returned to power last year, analysts say members of his government have appeared increasingly determined to make an example of Taketomi in their campaign to roll back what they call an excessively left-leaning tilt in education.

“So far, Taketomi has refused to bend to the central government’s demand that it follow the district’s orders. The town’s school superintendent, Anzo Kedamori, says the conservative book fails to teach children the hatred of war that his generation learned from bitter experience. During the Battle of Okinawa, hundreds of people in Taketomi perished when Japanese soldiers forced them to evacuate into malaria-ridden jungles.” NY Times. The battle rages, but perhaps Mr. Abe’s decreasing popularity will stem this tide.

Still, the lessons of history apply to this side of the Pacific as well. The groundswell that keeps our military at 41% of the entire world’s military expenditure-level is slowly breaking our economy and increasing our deficit that, in the longer term, will further decrease our influence in the world. We could deploy that capital to train the next generations to take back glory through skilled and educated competitive abilities, or we can continue to doom their futures with third-rate schooling and training until they are no long able to earn enough to pay for that glorious military. What will the United States be then? Will our surge back to the past make any difference?

I’m Peter Dekom, and I continue to be appalled at the rather total failure of our electorate and our most senior elected representatives to learn even the most basic lessons of history.