FOCUS:MEIJI ECONOMICS / A REVOLUTION FROM ABOVE

I

~ 1. How did the Meiji gain the capital to finance industrialization?~: 2..How had women's role changed throughout the process of industrialization?

~ --~ __ ~~Ul~la~JJtrna~d~itgi~on~~~'~w~e~re~d~is~C~M~(~ie:d~a~r~ld~k~ep~t~?~~ _

The Japanese Meiji revolution is called "a revolution from above". Why?Was the Meiji revolution a true revolution? [A true revolution is one whichchanges a society structurally from bottom to top- and puts inplacea new_r_u_h_·ng•...·._cI_3_S_S ....••]'-- ~. , __._

In ESSAY fORM ANSWER TI-IE QUESTIONS ABOVE, MAKING SORE YOU COVERTHE MATERIAl", BELOW IN YOUR ANSWER_

The Meiji Restoration:A Revolution from Above

] apan's transformation from a feudal, agrarian societvtan industrializing, technologically advanced society in lir-,'tle more than half a century has frequently been describy outside observers (if not by the] apanese themselin almost miraculous terms. Some historians have qtioned this characterization, pointing out that the acments of the Meiji leaders were spotty. In]apan's Emas a Modem State, the Canadian historian E. H. Nolamented that the Meiji Restoration was an "incorevolution" because it had not ended the economisocial inequities of feudal society or enabled themon people to participate fully in the governing prAlthough the genro were enlightened in many rethey were also despotic- and elitist, and" the distri .of wealth remained as unequal as it had been undold systern.P

These criticisms are persuasive, although they,also be applied to most other societies goingthroiearly stage of industrialization. In any event, fro;' 'tlji,,:nomic perspective, the Meiji Restoration was certainl}\'oof the great success stories of modem times. Not 0 .

the Meiji leaders put japan firmly on the path to e,and political development; they also managed to rthe unequal treaty provisions that had been impmid-century. Japanese achievements are especially:sive when compared with the difficulties experieChina, which was not only unable to realize sigchanges in its traditional society, but had not evena consensus on the need for doing so. Japan's achiemore closely resemble those of Europe, but wheWest needed a century and a half to achieve acant level of industrial development, the] apaneseit in forty years. ,

One of the distinctive features of japan's trans.'

fa traditional to a modem society during the Me'

that it took place for the most part without viole.kind of major social or political rev?lution th~tin so many other countries. The Meiji Restoraticbegan the process, has been called a "revoluabove," a comprehensive restructuring of japaneseby its own ruling group. . .

Technically, of course, the Meiji Restorationrevolution, since it was not violent and did nothe displacement of one ruling class by another.ing elites undertook to carry out a series of majorthat transformed society but left their own powe

tnewordsof one historian, it was "a kind of amalgamation,In which the enterprising, adaptable, or lucky individualsofthe old privileged classes [were] for most practical pur-

jl0ses-tiedup with those individuals of the old submergedclasses,who, probably through the same gifts, were able(@rise."In that respect, the Meiji Restoration resembles

·,tHe American Revolution more than the French Revolu-··rion;it was a "conservative revolution" that resulted in",gradualchange rather than rapid and violent change.6. . The differences between the Japanese response to the..;"fiestand that of China and many other nations in thelegionhave sparked considerable debate among students¢Kcomparativehistory, and a number of explanations haveheenoffered. Some have argued that Japan's success was.partlydue to good fortune. Lacking abundant natural

urces, it was exposed to less pressure from the West. an many of its neighbors. That argument is problemat-ical,however, and would probably not have been accepted

;,EYJapaneseobservers at the time. Nor does it explain whynationsunder considerably less pressure, such as Laos and

al, did not advance even more quickly. All in all, theod luck" hypothesis is not very persuasive.

.Some explanations have already been suggested in thisk. Japan's unique geographical position in Asia was cer-

inly a factor. China, a continental nation with a her-;,etogeneousethnic composition, was distinguished from its;'neighborsby its Confucian culture. By contrast, Japan was".,~ is~rid nation, ethnically and linguistically hornoge-,A~~s,and had never been conquered. Unlike the Chi-~~seor many other peoples in the region, the Japanese had

,Ntle to fear from cultural change in terms of its effect on,~theirnational iqentity. If Confucian culture, with all its, "3.ccoutrements,was what defined the Chinese gentleman,':s'is Japanese counterpart, in the familiar image, could dis-"card his sword and kimono and don a modem military uni-1formor a Western business suit and still feel comfortable

,ip' both worlds..~ Whatever the case, as the historian W. G. Beasley has,noted, the Meiji Restoration was possible because aristo-'J!ratic and capitalist elements managed to work together

"til a common effort to bring about national wealth andpower.The nature of the Japanese value system, with its

:.emphasison practicality and military achievement, mayF, 'alsohave contributed. Finally, the Meiji also benefited'from the fact that the pace of urbanization and commer-"~tial and industrial development had already begun to·,tquicken under the Tokugawa. Japan, it was said, was ripe

for change, and nothing could have been more suitable as""an antidote for the collapsing old system than the West-'em emphasis on wealth and power. It was a classic exam-.pieof challenge and response.

" ~" The final product was an amalgam of old and new,,,'nativeand foreign, forming a new civilization that was stilluniquely Japanese. There were some undesirable conse-

",quences,however. Because Meiji olitics was esseatially

despotic, Japanese leaders were able to fuse key traditionalelements such as the warrior ethic and the concept of feu-dalloyalty with the dynamics of modem industrial capi-talism to create a state totally dedicated to the possessionof material wealth and national power. This combina-tion of kokutai and capitalism, which one scholar hasdescribed as a form of "Asian fascism," was highly effec-tive but explosive in its international manifestation. Likemodem Germany, which also entered the industrial agedirectly from feudalism, Japan eventually engaged in a pol-icy of repression at home and expansion abroad in orderto achieve its national objectives. In Japan, as in Germany,it took defeat in war to disconnect the drive for nationaldevelopment from the feudal ethic and bring about thetransformation to a pluralistic society dedicated to livingin peace and cooperation with its neighbors. \Xlhether thattransformation has been completed in Japan only thefuture will tell.

t CONCLUSION;

Few areas of the world resisted' the Western incursion asstubbornly and effectively as East Asia. Although military,political, and economic pressure by the European powerswas relatively intense during this era, two of the mainstates in the area were able to retain their independence,while the third-Korea-was temporarily absorbed by oneof its larger neighbors. Why the Chinese and the Japa-nese were able to prevent a total political and militarytakeover by foreign powers is an interesting question. Cer-tainly, a key reason was that both had a long history aswell-defined states with a strong sense of national com-munity and territorial cohesion. Although China had fre-quently been conquered, it had retained its sense of uniqueculture and identity. Geography, too, was in its favor. Asa continental nation, China was able to survive partlybecause of its sheer size, while Japan possessed the advan-tage of an island location.

Even-more striking, however, is the different way inwhich the two states attempted to deal with the challenge.While the Japanese chose to face the problem in a prag-matic manner, borrowing foreign ideas and institutionsthat appeared to be of value and at the same time not inconflict with traditional attitudes and customs, Chinaagonized over the issue for half a century, while conserv-ative elements fought a desperate battle to retain a max-imum of the traditional heritage intact.

This chapter has discussed some of the possible reasonsfor those differences. In retrospect, it is difficult to avoidthe conclusion that the Japanese approach was the moreeffective one. While the Meiji leaders were able to set inmotion an orderly transition from a traditional to anadvanced society, in China the old system collapsed indisorder, leaving chaotic conditions that were still not