Japon milliyetçiliği ve kimliği-vaka çalışması: Milliyetçilik teorileri çerçevesinde Meiji Dönemi

The aim of this study is to state the coherence between Japanese nationalization experience and "Western" nationalism theories through the analyses of Japanese processes of being-nation, modernization, industrialization and militarization. As a very popular topic of social sciences, nationalism studies continue to draw attention by its theoretical and practical studies. Nationalism studies are attached to varying spheres, such as sociology, anthropology, political sciences, history or international relations and almost every study includes some parts from these different disciplines. As an interdisciplinary one, this study also benefits from these disciplines, but also seeks to merge nationalism theories with a case, specifically with the case of Japan. This case study is designed to explain a nonWestern country with the very own theories of the "West", so it may give an idea about the "applicability" or "universality" of European theories and methods to different cases. It must be said that, Japan –as a state which has a very popular claim about its "uniqueness"- is a very significant example for the application of nationalism theories. During the study, both similar and different characteristics of Japan will be mentioned and it is vital for an unbiased evaluation of Japan's situation. This study bases on three main chapters: The examination of selected European nationalism and identity theories, the historical background of "Japanese identity" and "Japanese nationalism", and the transformation of Japanese society by the Meiji Reforms on modernism, industrialism, militarism, education and gender policies. All these three parts are aimed to complete each other as the different branches of the same subject; because "nationalism" is not only a matter of "nationalist propaganda" or "fascist policies"; it is something much deeper and wider. For this reason, Japanese nationalism will be examined under the light of political history, Japanese myths and legends, its discourse and its relations with minority groups, its social, educational, industrial, military and gender policies, because all these features are the founder elements of nationalization process. As it's been said before, this study seeks to understand the applicability of European theories on Japanese nationalization case. For this reason, it starts with a brief history of nationalism and its development. Nationalism and its historical roots, the term of "nation" and its origins, the theorists who feed the academic researches on nationalism and the relation between nationalism, the emergence of modern state and Industrial Revolution issues are very important for starting of the research. Also, the notions on the nationalism's time and place of birth or the opinion of different political views on nationalism should be discussed. Besides, the main nationalism ix types – French and German- are milestones of the discussions on nationalism's history, so they are mentioned for a better understanding of the matter. When nationalism's history is briefly explained, the selected theories on nationalism are analyzed. Here, four different names and two different schools are examined. The analysis starts with Ernest Gellner, a leader theorist of modernist school. He bases his approach on the critic of primordialist school and refuses to mark nations as eternal and everlasting phenomena. Instead, he argues that nations are emerged as the "byproducts" of industrialism and modern state; they are an answer to the needs of the century. These features make them "mortal", and more importantly, "artificial". Although "nation" is accepted as a given phenomenon which is "natural" and exists since the first societies on the world, Gellner reverses this approach. As Gellner, Eric Hobsbawm contradicts to the primordialist school and shares modernist approach. He creates a new term for this area, "invented tradition". According to him, nations are invented by the nationalist and during this "invention", nationalists use symbols, traditions and reinterpreted myths; but if they can't find anything to use, they don't hesitate to create a "tradition". This opinion suggests suspecting about even the most "well-known" traditions; the history of "nations" should be interrogated and the formal history-making should be questioned. Benedict Anderson, as another modernist theorist, adds two different points to the theories. First, he criticizes labeling "inventions" as "artificial", but offers to see them as the products of "imagination and creation". Secondly, he adds a new relation to nationalism-modern state-industrialism triangle: The development of printing technologies and the rise of publishing sector which supports the local languages and communication. As a vital element of nationalization, communication creates "imagined" ties between people and helps connecting people as "members of the same nation" by giving them an illusion of "shared time". Although Anderson disagree the opinions on French Revolution as the origin of nationalism –he offers Creoles as the "origin"- and criticizes Gellner and Hobsbawm at some points, he contributes to modern schools by his theories. On the other hand, Anthony D. Smith starts his review by criticizing the modernist school. His approach –ethno-symbolism- gives more attention to symbols and traditions during the being-nation process and insists on the ethnic "cores" of nations. For this reason, his approach can be seen as "new primordialism" although some theorists prefer to focus on his thoughts on "artificial side" of the nations. In fact, Smith doesn't claim that nations are eternal, but says that "some" nations can really contain an ethnic core. Still, ethnicities cannot be named as nations and any nation cannot emerge before the modern times. Although his thoughts contradicts to modernists at some points, it is true that his theory is very useful for Japan, a country which is isolated, one of the most "homogeneous" examples, but still has problems with identity-making and minority groups. Japan is a complicated example which needs more than one school for being understood. By the analysis of their theories and their criteria of being-nation, the theoretical framework of the case is ready for fulfilling with Japan. Although this case study refers to a specific period –from Meiji Restoration to the end of Taishō Democracy-, a glance over the Japanese history is crucial, because of two reasons: First, as all other historical occasions, Meiji Restoration has deep historical roots and without the knowledge on the background, it is not possible to understand the dynamics of the Reform. Secondly, if the subject is about nationalization process and national identity, there are always some historical features reinterpreted, such as myths, legends, visual/oral symbols or traditions. Naturally, Japan is not an exception and the examination of Japanese national identity requires having this kind of knowledge. After the brief information on Japan's history and Meiji Reformation, the Japanese myths and legends which are attached to creation of national identity are studied. These kind of historical materials are used in many fields from formal educational system to historiography, or even gender issues are connected with these "selected" historical materials. It must be noted that these materials are particularly selected according to the agenda of nationalist policy-makers. This information is far from being unbiased or "purely historical", on the contrary, they are the "desired" parts of history which are extracted and "cleaned" according to the aims of governments. Since the Meiji Restorations, Japan has recreated its own history and national discourse. Its national discourse was "coherent" with its "own" history, because they both were tailor-made and completing each other as the pieces of a puzzle. By the aim of "being an imperial power", the discourse of Japan was assertive and ambitious, so, its imperial desires and tough discourse was reflected on its attitude about strangers and minorities in Japan. While Japan was creating its own national identity, it made this through excluding Ainus, Chinese, Koreans and Untouchables (Hisabetsu Burakumin). Japan had no pluralistic view on the identity question and always walked on a line of "we-and-others" concept. While Japan's discourse was changing against non-Japanese people, also its internal social system was rebuilding by governments. Samurais, as the leading power of Reforms and the element of new structure had completed their function and they were discharged. The new military army was shaped in Western style and there were no place for old style men, but still, many samurais gained important posts after the accepted to obey new system. This was a total social transition period and the new leading power of the period was zaibatsu – commercial enterprises which were supported by the governments-. After Japan modernized its army, it gained both natural resources and new markets, so his army and industry were in a close relation. Japan's governments made everything to strengthen this situation, the formal education started to "create" new generations as desired, both children and adults were convinced to supreme benefits of Japan and they were "serving" as soldiers, workers, farmers, officers, researchers… All formal education system and even gender policies were redesigned for an imagined Japan which "shines as Sun under the rule of Tennō". Japan had become a part of several conflicts with its neighbors and finally the Second World War because of its ambition which merged with military desires. During its imperial march, Japan has succeeded to create a "Japanese nation" and a "Japanese identity", but that was a creation which includes fascist tendencies. Even after the end of World War II, Japan continued to insist its "particularity", and it wasn't surprising, because that's what they've been "told". Many years after, Japanese scholars questioned deeply the "uniqueness myth" of Japan. If it's considered that Japan had initiated its nationalization process after its contact with Europe and USA, Japan had created its identity and nation according to the "rules" of European theories. Also, Japan's similar production system –a very close example of Europe in Middle Age- was very helpful for simplifying the transition as once Europe did. When Japan's similarities and peculiarities combined, the whole nationbuilding and identity-creating processes developed on a line which is coherent with European nationalism theories.