A DISCOURSE BY THREE DURNKARDS ON GOVERNMENT
by Nakae Chomin (note: in the Japanese format, family is given first)
ISBN: 0-8348-0192-2
The author Nakae Chomin (1847-1901) wrote this book in 1887 at a time
when Japan was trying to modernize itself. The Shogunate was
overthrown in 1868 and replaced by the "loyalist" Meiji government.
The author studied in France (1872-1874), and was called "the Rousseau
of the Orient." Perhaps it would have been better if he had studied
in the United States and become the "Madison of the East."
The book is an imaginary discourse of three people, who like to drink
about the direction Japan should take. On the one side is "The
Gentleman of Western Learning," on the other side is the "the Champion
of the East." The person in the middle listening to the two is Mr.
Nankai. The so called Gentleman of Western Learning is
the "idealistic" but impractical sort advocating abolishing the
military and relying on some sort of moral high ground to defend one's
self. ( Of course moral high ground is absolutely defenseless against
bullets. And a treaty which supposedly insured Belgium's neutrality
was ignored by the Germans in the First World War, as a scrap of
paper. ) The Champion of the East, who is supposedly more
practical advocates conquering an Asian or African country, to make
Japan a stronger country able to resist conquest by Western powers.
This too can be a counterproductive solution as shown by the
disastrous consequences for Japan after World War II.
The Gentleman of Western Learning seems to have French influence
citing the French Revolutionary ideals of "Liberty, Equality and
Fraternity" as a moral (pacifistic?) defense of Japan (pg 51). I
don't know if the author was being ironic, since the French national
anthem has strong martial references to glorifying bloodshed, not
pacifism. The Gentleman also worships the "god of evolution" citing
the supposed progress of government from chaos to despotism to
constitutionalism to democracy.
The Champion of the East glorifies military strength and advocates
picking on a bigger, but weaker country to conquer. In my opinion,
this person ignores the fact there are other powers that could
intervene. In fact when Japan did win the first Sino Japanese war
(1895) against China and tried to impose certain terms; Russia, Prussia
and France intervened to restrict Japan's demands. The Champion of
the East is right in saying that military might does make a
difference. But I think conquering neighbors could be
counterproductive.
It is interesting at the end of the book, Mr. Nankai talks about
trading with China instead of conquering it. He also says both
Gentleman and Champion are overly concerned about European conquest.
Perhaps Mr. Nankai was right, since the main focus of European powers
was China, which was carved up among the European powers. Japan was
seen more of a stopping off point, than a potential colony. And it
was in the interest of Britain to make an alliance with Japan against
Russia. And such an alliance was made in 1902. This Anglo-Japanese
alliance lasted about 20 years. Of course who one makes an alliance
with can determine the fate of a nation. Japan made the mistake of
allying itself with Germany and Italy in World War II, thus losing
it's empire.
While the Nakae Chomin is influenced by French thinking, he does not
appear to be against private property. In fact that seems to be one
of the rights, he would favor, judging by Mr. Gentleman's comments.
But he seems to be unaware that in the maxim "liberty, equality and
fraternity" can be contradictory goals. Because in guaranteeing
liberty, there will differences in wealth. But my impression is that
while he values liberty, he does not use "equality" in an economic
sense to contradict liberty. In other words, he does not say that
everyone has to have the exact same income and the same amount of
property. My impression is that "equality" is used in a legal sense,
i.e. that everyone, regardless of wealth, has the same law applied to
them.
This book reads more like a light hearted satire than an attempt
at deep philosophy. In a way it reminds me of the dialogues of
Socrates as found in Plato's writings, but with much less give and
take debate. Of course the title should be a dead give away that this
is not supposed to be an extensive work of scholarship, but a starting
point for debate.
Guy
# posted by GuyTak @ 9:19 PM
