Radical Nationalist in Japan: Kita Ikki, 1883-1937 9780674863088, 9780674863071

Citation preview

RADICAL NATIONALIST IN JAPAN: KITA IKKI, 1883-1937

Harvard East Asian Series 37

The East Asian Research Center at Harvard University administers research projects designed to further scholarly understanding of China, Korea, Japan, and adjacent areas.

KITA

IKKI

(Kita's signature appears on the title page)

RADICAL NATIONALIST IN JAPAN: KITA IKKI 1883-1937

George M. Wilson

Harvard University Press | Cambridge, Massachusetts 11969

© Copyright 1969 by the President and Fellows of Harvard College All rights reserved Distributed London

in Great Britain by Oxford University Press,

Preparation of this volume has been aided by a grant from the Ford Foundation. Library of Congress Catalog Card Number Printed in the United States of America

69-12740

F OR J O Y C E

PREFACE

^Modernization and its malcontents — these are the general area of concern in the present study. Our specific attention centers on one of the malcontents, Kita Ikki, a radical Japanese nationalist who condemned, not modernization, which he applauded, but the particular character which that process had assumed in his own country. Kita was an ideologue, so it is in the context of modern Japanese ideological history that we shall treat him. My hope is that this exercise will interest students of Japan's history and also those who concern themselves with ideology and social change in modernizing societies everywhere. A note of possible comparative interest: Kita was among the vast majority of his fellow countrymen for whom tradition — the inherited values of the remarkably durable Tokugawa system — played a role at least equally as decisive as Western ideas in shaping attitudes toward modernization. Because this is a study in ideological history, brief delineation of what I mean by "ideology" is in order here. I have used it as an umbrella-word to subsume all those programmatic ideas, rational or irrational, held by individuals or by groups, that call for social action, whether to alter or to main-

VÜi

I PREFACE

tain the status quo in the institutions of society. This characteristic differentiates it from speculative philosophy and also from theology, although ideology often draws inspiration or justification from one or both of these. Ideological history, then, can be thought of as a branch of the broader discipline of intellectual history dealing with men's beliefs and intentions in the realm of social action. In defining the ideology of the central subject of this study, Kita Ikki, as "radical nationalism," I mean that he, like other Japanese nationalists, believed in Japan's national identity, the justness of its national mission, and the promise of progress through national effort, but favored immediate and drastic — that is, "radical" — change in existing institutions to fulfill these goals. Throughout the book I have followed the customary practice of placing Japanese and Chinese surnames first. Translations are my own unless otherwise specified. T h e many debts an author incurs are as hard to define as they are to repay; acknowledging them all is impossible. My thanks go first and foremost to Professor Albert M. Craig, who supervised this study when it was a Ph.D. dissertation and has read drafts at every stage of its development. Others who have read and offered criticism on part or all of the manuscript are Professors Edwin O. Reischauer, Robert N. Bellah, Benjamin Schwartz, Robert B. Crawford, and Mr. Philip E. Lilienthal. I am grateful, too, for the advice of Professors Harris I. Martin, Roger F. Hackett, and William E. Steslicke. In Japan I have benefited from the counsel of Professors Hayashi Shigeru, Ishida Takeshi, Kuno Osamu, Hashikawa Bunzö, and Dr. Matsuda Michio. For his thorough understanding of modern Japanese nationalism and his willingness to communicate some of it to me through fre-

PREFACE

I IX

quent meetings, I owe a special debt to Mr. Takahashi Masae. Research, writing, and revision have proceeded in this country and Japan with the support of a Ford Foundation Foreign Area Training Fellowship (1960-1963); in Japan during the summer of 1965 under a grant from the Center for International Comparative Studies of the University of Illinois; in Cambridge during summer 1966 through a grant from the East Asian Research Center of Harvard University, to whose director, Professor John K. Fairbank, I am grateful for continued help and encouragement; and in 1966-1967 at the University of Illinois, whose Research Board provided a grant to type the manuscript. T h e staffs of the Harvard-Yenching Library, the Asia Library at the University of Michigan, the library of Tokyo University's Institute of Social Sciences (Shakai kagaku kenkyüjo), and the Far Eastern Library at the University of Illinois were most accommodating during the several periods of research that have made this work possible. I also want to thank Mrs. Olive Holmes and the staff of the East Asian Research Center at Harvard for their patient editorial assistance. Finally, I want to express my appreciation to Professor Marius В. Jansen of Princeton University, whose book The Japanese and Sun Yat-sen and subsequent study Sakamoto Ryöma and the Meiji Restoration represent pioneering Western efforts to understand the historical role of those intrepid private Japanese citizens known as "men of high purpose" — the shishi. T h e rest of us who till this ground owe much to him for plotting its contours. G.M.W. June 1, 1968 Bloomington, Indiana

CONTENTS Introduction Making of a Political Romantic Sado Background Romanticism and Meiji Socialism

Anti-Kokutairon

16

The Hibiya Riots The Official Kokutairon Socialism and the Kokutai Reconciled Remaking Japanese Socialism "Critique of Pure Socialism" The First Book: Impact and Response

3

China Observer Into the Chinese

44

Revolution

A PRIVATE HISTORY OF THE CHINESE REVOLUTION

Conversion to Nichiren Buddhism The Second China Experience

A Plan to Reorganize Japan Writing the REORGANIZATION Political Reorganization Economic Reorganization Social Reorganization Kita as a Modernizer A Mission for Modern Japan

PLAN

65

xii

I CONTENTS

Taisho Radical Nationalism

88

Right and Left in Taishö Social Thought Ökawa Shümei and the Yüzonsha Yüzonsha Activities Collapse of the Yüzonsha A Decade in the Shadows

6

Rebel's End

113

The Shöwa Restoration Idea The February 26 Affair Trial by Court-Martial Execution and Legacy

7

Kita Ikki in Japanese Historiography

137

Ideological Father of Japanese Fascism An Unorthodox Socialist Prophet of Japan's Crisis in Asia

Conclusion

169

Notes

175

Bibliography

201

Glossary

218

Index

225

RADICAL NATIONALIST IN JAPAN: KITA IKKI, 1883-1937

IN TRO DUC TIO N

odern national consciousness in Japan developed out of the ideas of later Tokugawa-period thinkers representing, in particular, the Mito, Dutch studies ( Ra n ga k u ), and "practical learning" ( ji t s u ga k u ) schools of thought, who looked right across the political divisions of the bakufu-han system and saw their country as a unit involved in an emerging world order made up of competitive national states. The new government which emerged from the Meiji Restoration of 1868 was the prime embodiment of this national consciousness, but after the turn of the century, and especially after World War I, there were some Japanese who called in the name of nationalism for radical reform of domestic institutions on grounds that a great modern nation ought to be doing more for its people. One such radical nationalist is Kita Ikki, who lived from 1883 to 1937. For some of his countrymen he became an almost legendary nationalist hero, while to the great majority he remained unknown or misunderstood. Early in the twentieth century this private and unattached "man of high purpose" ( shishi ) formulated a comparative theory of social evolution that helped him look at all countries, East and

2

I INTRODUCTION

West, in new perspective. T o him revolution was the fated culmination of earlier evolutionary processes, the necessary step by which a society enters the modern world. Completing Japan's revolution was therefore both the destiny and the duty of every Japanese patriot, and he devoted his energies unstintingly to this task. T h e bare outlines of Kita's life mark him off as an unusual and controversial figure. For example, in its edition for July 20, 1906, the Japanese socialist journal Hikari praised "comrade" Kita as a "very young and promising" socialist, the author of a voluminous work on "pure socialism" in Japan. 1 Yet scarcely more than a decade later, in 1919, this same individual wrote A Plan for the Reorganization of Japan,2 which historians have usually condemned as a blueprint for the introduction of a "fascist" system. Some authors even see it as a Japanese parallel to Mein Kampf* But despite his nationalist convictions, the Japanese army in 1937 executed him for alleged complicity in a military insurrection that occurred in Tokyo on February 26, 1936, even though this insurrection regularly gets the blame for bringing forth a "fascist" regime apparently representing just what Kita is supposed to have wanted. Because of the curious and dramatic turns so evident in Kita's career, it is clear that he was hardly a "typical" or "average" Japanese, intellectual or otherwise. Nor was he a policymaker or a charismatic mobilizer of the masses. In his own personal and often very solitary way, however, he was an ideologue and activist whose experiences mirrored, and whose writings consciously strove to resolve, the many tensions of a nation that was rapidly becoming a modern urban-industrial society. Japanese authors who have written of Kita as a "fascist"

INTRODUCTION

| 3

assume that some abrupt shift in his thinking must have come about during the thirteen years that separate his book on "pure socialism" from his later work on reorganizing Japan. They see him as a Japanese analogue to that portion of the interwar European intellectual community which found in fascism a way to synthesize the twin goals of reforming domestic institutions and expanding the national prestige abroad. They generally interpret "fascism" in Marxian fashion, assuming that a society which is both capitalist and militantly expansionistic must be fascist and that a thinker who contributed to the coming of such a system should be labeled in the same manner.4 This sort of reasoning seems to me to dote on labels and categories to the detriment of understanding and therefore to distort rather than clarify our picture of what actually took place in early twentieth-century Japan. The historical process by which European fascism appeared and came to prevail first in Italy and then in Germany has no parallel in Japan. 5 Japanese government during the nineteen thirties was neither new nor revolutionary, although because of technological change it did raise authoritarianism to levels unprecedented in the Meiji experience. For his part, Kita was an iconoclast permanently at odds with the status quo, and in no way a supporter of the existing regime, before or after 1930. Close study of his thought as it developed over time reveals a basic consistency which belies the notion that he shifted from one position to another. It is a central conclusion of this book that the apparent transformation from socialism to fascism which many writers ascribe to Kita was really no transformation at all, for throughout his career he manifested two chief ideological preoccupations: a belief in the desirability of change and

4

I INTRODUCTION

modernization, based not only on Western ideas but on a traditional attitude toward society and social action, which he absorbed and inherited from the dominant neo-Confucian approach of the Tokugawa era; and an intense faith in Japan's national mission to regenerate an Asia inundated by imperialist power politics. In Chapters 1 through 6 we shall see how these two preoccupations conditioned both his ideas and his activities. Chapter 7 presents a survey of postwar Japanese historiography on Kita, showing how changes in his image reflect the broader intellectual concerns of the nation as it approached the centennial of the Meiji Restoration.

1 I MAKING OF A POLITICAL ROMANTIC

J

apan has always had its share of romantics. From the shining courtiers of the Heian palaces to the Byronesque poets of T o k y o there are striking continuities that go to make up a romantic literary tradition, but what about political romanticism? Here too Japan has a long tradition: history calls to mind the names of any number of Japanese intensely caught up with political concerns who have conceived programs of Utopian idealism to serve the needs of a society in which the pace and pressure of change have continuously increased, especially since about the middle of the sixteenth century. Many of these political romantics, including Kita Ikki, hailed from the rough northwestern coastal area on the Sea of Japan facing the distant gray banks of the Asian mainland. Satö Nobuhiro of Dewa, author of a grandiose scheme for national consolidation that would have made Tokugawa Japan a centralized state with nearly total political and economic powers, foreshadows the ideas of later reformist thinkers like Kita. Takayama Chogyü, a novelist and critic who grew up in Yamagata Prefecture, turned from a sentimental Nihonshugi (Japanism) to Nietzschean individualism and then sought to synthesize the two by embracing Nichiren

6

I CHAPTER ONE

Buddhism just before his premature death in 1902. Ishiwara Kanji, also from Yamagata, rose to the rank of lieutenant general in the army during the troubled nineteen thirties, and he too professed a deep faith in Nichirenism. Kita Ikki had something in common with all three of these individuals. Like Satö he devised a plan to reconstruct Japan along severe centralist lines. Like Takayama he remained a solitary figure all his life, a man whose views were too esoteric to appeal to the masses. Like both Takayama and Ishiwara, he turned to a belief in Nichiren Buddhism and faithfully chanted the liturgies of the Lotus Sutra. Finally, he shared with all of them a highly individualistic personality which, with the exception of Isiwara, led them to stand outside the standard professions and organizations of society, offering u p critical appraisals of the status quo in hopes of encouraging change. Dissatisfied with established patterns when these seemed ill-suited to national needs, Kita combined an iconoclastic attitude and a romantic temperament — a pair of traits that stayed with him to the end of his days. SADO BACKGROUND

Sado, Kita's birthplace, ranks fifth in size among the Japanese home islands, although at 330 square miles in area it poses no real challenge to fourth-place Shikoku. Sado is an "s"-shaped jut of land featuring a narrow waistline of fertile plain bordered on the north and south by curving ranges of hills. T h e island lies some 50 miles out to sea from the major Honshu port of Niigata. It abounds with forests, fisheries, and farms, has a population of about 120,000 (I960), and has been a part of Japanese civilization since proto-historic times.

MAKING OF A POLITICAL ROMANTIC | 7

In the Nara period the central government formally designated it as a province, and a kokubunji or provincial temple was established there sometime during the mid-eighth century in accordance with the imperial court's decree that every province should have one. 1 For most of its history, however, Sado has fallen into some larger administrative unit, and today it is attached to Niigata Prefecture. T h e island has a place in Japanese lore as a haven for exiled notables. 2 In 1221, following the unsuccessful Jökyü uprising in Kyoto against the growing power of the Kamakura Höjö, emperor Juntoku came in exile to Sado. As a youth Kita often visited his tomb near Mano, which is much admired even today. But the most famous figure ever banished to Sado is unquestionably Nichiren, the dynamic popular priest whose name is linked with an intolerant, and in some ways nationalistic, Buddhist sect. Nichiren infuriated Kamakura officialdom because of his condemnation of all competing faiths, including the other sects of Buddhism, and in 1271 the bakufu exiled him to Sado where he remained for several years.3 It is said that Kita used a copy of the Lotus Sutra left on the island by Nichiren himself. Tradition has it that the shogunal administrators who governed Sado during the Tokugawa period were particularly harsh toward the island populace. They had come only incidentally to govern, since the principal reason Edo had made the island a direct shogunal territory was in order to fill bakufu coffers by exploiting the gold and silver mines that had been opened there in 1601. But the men of Sado were made of rebellious stuff, observes Kita's younger brother Reikichi in his autobiography. They had an ingrained urge to favor the underdog, to chafe at the authority of bureaucrats from far places. Sado's past

8

I CHAPTER ONE

abounds with tales of the heroism of "righteous people" (gimiri) who rebelled against bakufu tyranny. Nineteenthcentury Sado Confucianists like Maruyama Meihoku, one of whose disciples later tutored Kita in the Chinese classics, made use of the island's tradition of protest to advance the Mito doctrine of sonnö or "revere the emperor." 4 After the Meiji Restoration, minken (civil rights) ideas joined sonnöism on Sado. Both doctrines bore the stamp of Japanese nationalism as well as a characteristic Sado resentment of authority. T h e minken movement began all over Japan largely as a protest against the arbitrary use of government power, so the demand for civil rights never seemed incompatible with imperial loyalism or even military expansion abroad. And on Sado as much as anywhere in Japan, the combination of popular nationalism and anti-government sentiment stimulated great interest in the minken movement. Into this setting Kita was born in 1883, the eldest son of a prominent sake brewer and community leader in the town of Minato. Today Minato has become part of Ryötsu, Sado's chief port, which fronts on the Sea of Japan and is bordered on the rear by a sizable lake called Kamoko. Kita Reikichi describes the town as "a floating plot of grass sandwiched between the sea and the lake," and there is no doubt that a sense of insularity and closeness to the water pervades the area. 5 T h e history of the Kita family represents a virtual epitome of social developments during the Tokugawa era. Kita's great-grandfather Rokuröji served as headman of Minato, and later his father Keitarö became mayor of the town. A prosperous sake business, mixed with forestry and other enterprises begun by the energetic Rokuröji, underlay the family's well-being and exemplifies the growth of commercial

MAKING OF A POLITICAL ROMANTIC | 9

activity in rural Japan. Dimly remembered from the past, however, Kita's family prided itself on possessing samurai background. Evidently the first traceable ancestors were two brothers named Kitagawa, who had been samurai retainers of the Owari Dainagon and on account of some wrongdoing had fled to Sado to begin a new life in exile there. T h e shortened version "Kita" soon became the family surname, and its prestige stemmed both from success in commercial ventures and from its claim to inherited samurai status.® Kita's given name was Terujirö, designating a second son. (It was much later that he began to use "Ikki.") Though in fact he was the firstborn son, he received the name "Terujirö" as a kind of good-luck omen to ward off evils that might befall the eldest.7 From early childhood the boy showed promise of sensitivity and intelligence. He began to study kambun at the age of ten and quickly developed a distinguished style of his own. So excellent was his calligraphy that fifty years later Niigata Prefecture's educational association still displayed some of his early work. He read widely in Confucian literature and took particular interest in the Mencius. In some ways his training curiously parallels that of the fanatic sonnö ideologue from bakumatsu-period Chöshü, Yoshida Shöin, who himself had once visited Sado, in 1852, to pay homage at the tomb of emperor Juntoku. 8 As a boy Kita also became something of an artist. During the Sino-Japanese War of 1894-95, his efforts to depict scenes of heroic Japanese soldiers in battle stirred the islanders so much that he and his two younger brothers were able to sell the drawings for five sen apiece. Early in his school years, Kita developed an eye ailment called pterygium, which involved the protrusion of a membrane over his right eyeball. In 1891 and again in 1898 this

10 I CHAPTER ONE

condition forced him to drop out of school temporarily, and twice his family had to send him to Tokyo University Hospital for treatment. In the capital for the first time in 1898, the adolescent found his interests broadening, and when he returned to Sado the following year he paid scant attention to his studies. In 1900 he failed to advance a grade on account of poor marks in chemistry and gymnastics and had to quit school. T h i s terminated his regular education, and for a time he wandered alone across the fields and capes of Sado, dreaming and planning, "leading the idle life of a rural semiintellectual," as Reikichi cuttingly puts it. 9 ROMANTICISM AND MEIJI SOCIALISM

After the periodical Myöjö made its appearance in April 1900, Kita found himself enthralled by the new style of romantic poetry it presented. H e apparently contributed some of his own verse to Myöjö, as did many other unknown young poets all over the country. 10 Once he submitted an appreciation of the two bright lights in the new-poetry school, the husband and wife team of Yosano Tekkan and Akiko. H e used the pen name "Musashibö Benkei," recalling that legendary twelfth-century monk-hero who figures so prominently in folklore concerning the tribulations of Minamoto no Yoshitsune during his unsuccessful struggle against his jealous brother Yoritomo, first shogun of the Kamakura bakufu. T h u s labeling himself an avid romantic, Kita delivered ringing accolades for the poetry of T e k k a n and especially that of Akiko. H e praised their free and sensual approach to matters of the heart, finding in the new poetry an excellent vehicle for expressing the passions of the awakened common people. T o the "little rascals like this Musashibö

MAKING OF A POLITICAL ROMANTIC |

11

Benkei," wrote Kita in reference to himself and his generation, such poetry "seems really best for the time being." 11 "Their poems," he said of the two Yosanos, "have a value to be left to future generations. Both of their names will certainly be immortal in literary history." Nevertheless, he criticized them for a certain dryness that he discerned in the love poems they had written since their marriage. "Of course I do not mean that they are no longer capable of love odes, but it is true that the two of them since their marriage are not [the same as] the two of them before. Perhaps they are fulfilled." 12 It was not something Kita could say of himself. His search for a cause went on relentlessly, carrying him beyond the literary romanticism of the Myöjö school. On Sado as elsewhere, the turn of the century brought a wave of fresh ideas. Socialism inherited the mantle of protest once worn by minken thinkers. Young socialists leaned toward the romantic, more influenced by the example of the effervescent Ferdinand Lassalle than by Karl Marx, and a publication like Myöjö yields a clue to the curious bond between socialism and romanticism that marks the late Meiji intellectual scene. Kösaka Masaaki has written that Myöjö, although a literary magazine, was "linked to the socialism of that time. For this reason it was opposed to anything smacking of Japan's feudal past and at the same time was sympathetic towards, and concerned with, social problems." 13 In addition to the romantics, many of the early socialists were Christians, whose motive for seeking to solve problems of poverty and social unrest in the cities stemmed from a sympathetic humanism. Private thinking on the social question centered at first on an effort to set u p a labor-union movement, but this foundered in 1900 in the wake of the government's revised "police peace law" (chian keisatsu hö).

12

I CHAPTER

ONE

Thereafter it seemed desirable to establish a political party to advance the socialist cause. A generation removed from the founders of the minken movement, these socialists followed a similar course of development: when labor unionism collapsed under government pressure, some of its supporters moved instead to political opposition, just as minken leaders had proceeded to form a political party after the Satsuma Rebellion of 1877 demonstrated the futility of direct opposition to the government. The first socialist party in Japan began and ended on the same day in May 1901.14 It was called Shakai minshutö (Social Democratic Party), and it had six founders, of whom five were Christians, including Abe Isoo, Katayama Sen, and Kinoshita Naoe. The lone non-Christian was Kötoku Shüsui. Aware that a socialist party was to be formed, the police visited its headquarters and declared it disbanded on the day of its founding. Though short-lived, to say the least, the Social Democratic Party provided much of the leadership and program for Japanese socialism over the next half-decade. The general strategy followed by the socialists was to identify with the European revisionist movement and seek progress purely within the limits of the law. These men acted as the Japanese arm of the international socialist movement. Socialism found a response in many parts of Japan, including Sado Island. For two decades Kita's maternal uncle, Homma Kazumatsu, had been a fiery supporter of the minken movement in Sado politics. Once he and Kita's father had gone all the way to Echigo in central Honshu in order to hear a speech by minken leader Baba Tatsui. After 1900 Homma declared a new enthusiasm for socialism. In 1904 he attended a socialist antiwar rally at the Kanda Y.M.C.A. in Tokyo, and after the meeting he exclaimed that

MAKING O F A POLITIC AL ROMANTIC

| 13

"the present socialist party is the Liberal Party (Jiyütö) of old. Today's SeiyQkai is no good!" 15 Kita's own development as a political thinker dates from about 1897, when he was fourteen. In that year he entered the new middle school on Sado, and in 1898 he skipped a grade. His desk at school was cluttered with literature, especially the work of Köda Rohan and Ozaki Köyö, two authors of the romantic school who often wrote novels with themes harking back to the urban Genroku culture of Tokugawa times. But Kita also read Kokumin sösho, edited by the leading light in the heiminshugi movement (populism), Tokutomi Sohö, whose early flirtation with Manchester liberalism gave way after 1894 to advocacy of Japanese imperialism. In addition, Kita received literature from the Seikyösha, a group associated with the idea of preserving Japan's cultural tradition ( kok u s u i hozon) as preached by such men as Miyake Setsurei and Shiga Shigetaka.16 In 1900, the year in which he left school for good, Kita began to publish a series of articles on the Japanese kokutai (the "national polity" or "Japanese way of life"; lit., "form of state"). The articles appeared in a local daily, Sado shimbun, whose publisher, Mori Chikaki, had been a student of the Christian thinker Uchimura Kanzö and was greatly taken by "progressive ideas." 17 Kita's analysis of the kokutai was so critical of the government-sponsored interpretation of Japanese history that the prefectural police came to Sado to investigate him, spurred by an unfavorable review of his writings in the Niigata skimbun. When they found that Kita's father was one of the community's most respected members, the incident was hushed up, but his father ordered him to desist, ending his first effort as political critic in midpassage. His enthusiasm unsated, however, he soon became

14 I CHAPTER ONE

an ardent socialist. When the Heimin shimbun саше out in November 1903, he ordered some ten copies from Tokyo and gave them to former schoolmates and younger students in the Sado middle school. In 1905 the principal had to take personal responsibility and resign after Kita's youngest brother, Shösaku, and some of his friends staged a socialist rally at a local inn. 18 Why was Kita attracted to socialism? We shall see that its Utopian ideals, as he interpreted them, furnished a basis for his critique of the Meiji government and its ideology. Also, as Kita Reikichi has suggested, socialism provided an "economic basis" for his brother's minken ideas. Just as important, it offered an outlet for an emotional and romantic temperament. As yet Kita had formulated no plans for a career. He did as much reading as he could with his one good eye and in idle moments wandered around the island dreaming of future glories. Once when Reikichi had come home on vacation from preparatory school in Tokyo, his older brother proposed that the two of them set up a deepsea fishing enterprise. On other occasions he suggested that they go into cattle-farming or buy pigs to raise for slaughter. Reikichi remarks that at the time he had never yet seen a pig and that he constantly rebuffed his brother's wild schemes. Bergson, he adds, divides men into three groups: men of impulse, dreamers, and men of discretion or wisdom. His brother was then approximately three parts man of impulse and seven parts dreamer. 19 T h e mixture does not seem to have pleased Reikichi, who himself displayed a more practical bent. He soon entered Waseda University and eventually served many terms as a dietman in the House of Representatives. In the fall of 1904 Kita went to Tokyo to live with Rei-

MAKING OF A POLITICAL ROMANTIC |

15

kichi at a small boarding house near Waseda. He began to audit lectures at the university, but in the summer of the following year he returned to Sado. There he fell in love with a girl from a neighboring village and asked his mother for permission to marry her (his father had died in 1903). T h e girl, his mother replied, might be all right but her mother was "slovenly." So permission was denied. 20 Seeking to rechannel his ardor, Kita went back to Tokyo in the fall of 1905. In essence his character was formed and his interests marked out. A promising young man hampered by an incomplete education, a series of frustrating personal experiences, and a serious eye ailment, he burned with a desire to prove to the world how great his talents really were. He was a political romantic at large in the volatile atmosphere of late Meiji Japan.

2 I ANTI-KOKUTAIRON

l / i t a wrote his first book against a background of widespread popular discontent over the outcome of the Russo-Japanese War. During the summer of 1905, Japan pressed Russia to heed certain crucial demands and bring the war to a close. T h e government wanted Russian interests in Manchuria transferred to Japan, as well as cession of the island of Sakhalin plus a large indemnity to cover the costs of the war. T h e Portsmouth Treaty did hand Russian holdings in Manchuria over to Japan, including the South Manchurian Railway and the naval base at Port Arthur, but there was no indemnity and the Japanese received only the southern half of Sakhalin. Such a solution still appeared highly favorable from the government's point of view, since Japan's financial resources were too exhausted to permit any lengthy reopening of hostilities. But the Japanese people were generally unaware of these considerations. Throughout the war, newspapers had highlighted government notices of overwhelming victory, prompting the public to expect greater gains than the peace settlement actually brought. T h e limited terms of the Portsmouth

ANTI-KOKUTAIRON

| 17

Treaty came as a rude shock, and resentment flared up all over the country in the month of September. THE HIBIYA RIOTS

In Tokyo, a huge protest rally was called for September 5, the day the treaty was signed.1 Its chief organizer was Köno Hironaka, veteran Jiyütö leader of the eighteen eighties and dietman from Fukushima. Fearing trouble, the police banned the meeting and fenced off Hibiya Park where it was to be held. But throngs of people gathered at the park and the rally began anyway. A series of banzai shouts ended it early in the afternoon, at which point the crowds grew unruly. They stoned the headquarters of the Kokumin shimbun, a pro-government newspaper, and thereafter violence spread like wildfire as masses of demonstrators surged through the streets of central Tokyo venting their anger on the police. They attacked police boxes at Hibiya, Shiba Park, Kyöbashi, Nihombashi, and Kanda. Then they fanned out all over the city, throwing the wooden police boxes into canals or burning them right in the streets. Crowds also set fire to streetcars and attacked several Christian churches, apparently on grounds that anything Western was anathema on this day of national humiliation. Nor were government leaders immune to attack, as shown when a large crowd attempted to burn down the residence of Home Minister Yoshikawa Akimasa, whose ministry controlled the national police. One may even speculate that public hostility to the great authority of the police played some part in provoking the violence, which in any event lasted for six days and nights and resulted in the arrest of

l8

J CHAPTER TWO

some 2,000 persons. Seventeen deaths and over 2,000 casualties occurred. T h e government declared martial law and suspended publication of most newspapers, and curfews remained in force for over a month. Kita had returned to T o k y o just prior to the Hibiya riots. Unlike the socialists whose doctrines he had preached in the quiet confines of Sado, he had supported Japan's war aims, so he sympathized with the popular outpouring of resentment that the riots plainly represented. In his opinion the people were demonstrating for the right things, but for the wrong reasons. Justifiably, they hoped to see an increase in Japan's prestige, but they were moved to show their emotions because of their faith in the emperor system. Kita believed that the system had become a tool in the hands of evil and selfish government leaders — the M e i j i oligarchs, headed by Itö Hirobumi, architect of the M e i j i Constitution, Yamagata Aritomo, builder of the modern Japanese army, and his protege, Katsura T a r ö , prime minister during the RussoJapanese W a r . H e resolved to write a book spelling out this lesson for the people of Japan. H e planned to base his study on strict scientific principles in accordance with the best positivist thinking of nineteenth-century European theorists. Kita worked frantically in preparing to write the book. H e audited a number of courses at Waseda, taking copious notes on the lectures of legal scholars Ukita Kazutami and Ariga Nagao, as well as the Christian socialist A b e Isoo. H e spent months reading at Ueno Library in translated Western sources, which by then were available in prodigious quantity. A f t e r amassing over 2,000 pages of notes, he

finally

started to write. Reikichi recalls his brother's frenetic approach to the problem: " W h e n writing . . .

he was as tense as a lunatic,

ANTI-KOKUTAIRON

|

19

imagining the hypothetical enemy before his eyes and biting his nails until his fingertips bled." 2 In six months he finished the entire manuscript, which ran to 1,000 pages when at last it was published. The trouble was that no reputable publisher wanted to touch it. He was an unknown author whose subject matter looked seditious, even though he himself felt confident that it would not be prohibited. Reasoning that freedom of speech and publication would suffer no curtailment, since the liberal Saionji Kimmochi had taken over from Katsura as prime minister in the wake of the Hibiya Affair, he grew increasingly anxious to see his work in print. He even took it to the Heiminsha and asked the socialists there to publish it. But, as told by Arahata Kanson, one of the younger socialists of the time, the manuscript was simply too big to consider. 3 Eventually Kita hired an unknown printer who demanded ¥100 in advance for undertaking the job. He paid it, but the man turned out to be a swindler who took the money and ran off without doing a thing. In desperation he asked his family for help. Enthusiastic as ever, his uncle Homma Kazumatsu found a reliable printer, and family funds, though much scarcer than before, were used to pay him. Homma approved of his nephew's book because it dealt with socialism. As a protesting liberal of former years (he was known as "the Köno Hironaka of Sado"), Homma felt that socialism represented the wave of the future, as had liberalism a quarter of a century earlier. He said that "Today's socialism is like the doctrine of the Jiyütö at the time we entered it" — meaning that it was progressive and beneficial for Japan. 4 Finally the book was printed in a run of 500 copies. It appeared bearing the date May 9, 1906, but ten days later the Home Ministry banned it.

20

I CHAPTER TWO

THE OFFICIAL KOKUTAIRON

Kita's book, Kokutairon and Pure Socialism, attacked the prevailing "orthodox myth" (kokutairon, lit., "theory of the form of state"). 5 His object was to analyze Japanese history and disprove the officially sanctioned interpretation of the kokutai, which legal scholars, philosophers, and historians were disseminating at the time. He also intended to take the Japanese socialists to task for what he felt was their misrepresentation of socialism. T h e concept of kokutai is of such importance that we should pause here to consider briefly how it evolved in Meiji thought. T h e term rarely appeared until the nineteenth century, when publicists of the later Mito school began to use it in connection with the rise of sonnö jöi — the movement to "revere the emperor and repel the barbarian." According to political scientist Ishida Takeshi, kokutai has at least two connotations for the modern Japanese: 6 the circumstances surrounding the alleged founding of the dynasty by the emperor Jimmu in 660 B.C.; and the distinctive features and "divine" character of the Japanese land itself. These two elements came to be fused in the image of the emperor as the unique leader of the nation. In the world of scholarship it was Katö Hiroyuki who first distinguished between the kokutai ("form of state") and the seitai ("form of government"). As a member of the early Meiji group of Western-influenced "enlighteners" called the Meirokusha, Katö wrote a book in 1874 entitled A New Theory of the Kokutai. He stated that all modern countries aim to establish a constitutional form of state, but that the form of government or seitai might be either monarchic or democratic.

ANTI-KOKUTAIRON

| 21

Hozumi Yatsuka, professor of law at Tokyo Imperial University, subsequently reversed Katö's formula by asserting that the "locus of sovereignty" ( sh u k e n no shozai) determines the kokutai of a given country, while the seitai corresponds to the "form of the exercise" ( kö d ö no keishiki) of sovereignty.7 The kokutai could be either monarchic or republican, depending on where sovereignty resides — in the person of the monarch or in the people. And the "form of the exercise of sovereignty" — the seitai — might be either authoritarian ( s e n s e i ) or constitutional ( r i kk e n ). 8 According to this formulation, Japan after 1890 possessed a monarchic form of state and a constitutional form of government: a constitutional monarchy in which the emperor was sovereign. The development and diffusion of a popular ideology based on the idea of kokutai proceeded during the entire latter half of the Meiji era. This complex operation had several aspects: the Imperial Constitution of 1889, the Imperial Rescript on Education of 1890, and the Civil Code, which took effect in 1898, all suported the kokutairon and represented, respectively, its political, ethical, and legal sides. Japan's leaders were not fulfilling some mysteriously preestablished blueprint: they simply went ahead on an ad hoc basis to fashion a system that would ensure fukoku kyöhei — a rich nation with great military strength. But they did fasten on the kokutai concept as a legitimating device to enable Japan to build institutions capable of making the nation competitive with powerful Western countries. Through the educational system the kokutairon ideology was disseminated to the general public. Scholars whose road to success lay in appointment to the imperial universities acted as publicists for a "national morality" ( kok u mi n

22

I CHAPTER

TWO

dötoku) and set out quite consciously to reinforce the lessons of the Constitution, Education Rescript, and Civil Code. T h e eighteen nineties alone, for instance, witnessed the publication of over 200 commentaries on the Education Rescript.9 These tracts stressed the official view of Japan's "unchanging kokutai" and helped to amplify the kokutairon into a popular ideology of overarching proportions, which served to promote national unity and solidarity. When a small group of socialists appeared on the scene in the first decade of the twentieth century, the issue of socialism's relationship to the kokutai came immediately to the fore. Hozumi Yatsuka said that the kokutai was embodied in the sovereign rule of the imperial line. Tokyo University philosophy professor Inoue Tetsujirö and other "national morality" spokesmen held that all Japanese were tied together under the emperor in one great family. If socialism sought only the good of the working class and even transcended national boundaries, did it not "infringe" on Japan's unique kokutai, which embraced "all the people"? T h e socialists wrestled inconclusively with this question for several years. SOCIALISM AND THE KOKUTAI

RECONCILED

Kita's book Kokutairon and Pure Socialism attempted the promethean feat of proving the whole issue null and void. He intended to redefine both socialism and the kokutai, 10 claiming that there could be no real conflict between them because the genuine kokutai was "legally social democratic," a fact the official kokutairon failed to perceive, and because socialism's purposes were best served by partnership with popular nationalism, the mainstay of the "social democratic"

ANTI-KOKUTAIRON

| 23

kokutai. In essence he proclaims socialism and the kokutai identical! How did he propose to verify so startling an interpretation? Kita begins by applying the theory of biological evolution to human society, which he terms "one biological species." 1 1 Like all other such species, the goal toward which society forever strives is its own "survival and evolution." Based on an optimistic appraisal of the prospects for "social evolution," he predicts the ultimate advent of a Utopian society made up of all mankind. "Social democracy" is the highest step yet attained on the ladder of social evolution, and socialism, as the representative ideology of social democracy, is in full accord with the basic principle of biological evolution. Contrary to the views of its critics, Kita affirms that socialism has its basis entirely in biology. "Today, criticism against socialism on a philosophical basis lies in the assertion that it is wild fantasy contrary to the principle of biological evolution, since it plans to eliminate the struggle for survival. This is truly a major problem. [Socialism] cannot diverge from the struggle for survival." 12 T h e coming of Utopia could not terminate the struggle for survival, he argues, but will transform its character. At present the struggle is carried on between classes at home and among states internationally. In the future Utopian society, the struggle for survival would involve mankind's continuing search for sustenance in competition with the animal kingdom, while on the individual level each man would compete with all other men in order to obtain the most desirable mate. In other words, food and sex will always remain the object of a struggle for survival. "Socialism will not escape from the theory of evolution to force an elimination or slowdown of the struggle for survival . . .

2 4 I CHAPTER TWO

Th e re will be a struggle for food to maintain the great social unit of all mankind [utopia] against the other biological species, and . . . there will be a male-female struggle for the ideal reality of the individual unit against other individuals of the same species [man]." 1 3 Having disposed of the elementary philosophical problem to his satisfaction, Kita turned to the main business at hand. He sought to establish a new "philosophy of history" which proved that social democracy characterized the kokutai of post-Restoration Japan. T o Kita, history simply meant the record of social evolution. "History is not repetitive," 1 4 he says, but proceeds in linear fashion according to the evolutionary progress of society. Unfortunately the Japanese have never recognized this. " I n Japan there have been those who recorded historical facts, but there has not yet been a single philosophy of history. T h e meaning of history lies in knowing the process of social evolution. Th a t is, the philosophy of history means . . . the theory of social evolution." 16 Japan, he asserts, has reached the stage of social democracy. How did he define this stage? " 'Social democracy' means the ideal of extending political power to all elements of the state, who have been awakened by individualism. It does not mean the dogma that sovereignty rests with the people . . . As the name socialism indicates, social democracy asserts that sovereignty resides in the state [which is equivalent to society!]. It is the attempt to support, or to acquire, a democratic form of government, in that all elements of the state have power and are components of the highest organ, for the purpose of trying to maintain the sovereignty of the state." lfi Kita proceeded to examine Japanese history to show how social democracy emerged from the process of evolution.

ANTI-KOKUTAIRON

|

25

He wanted to demonstrate that the Meiji Restoration could not possibly have "restored" a system supposedly present in antiquity, for that is contrary to the law of progressive change through social evolution. Basically, the official kokutairon interpretation of Japanese history held that Japan's emperors had acted as fathers ruling over the national family in a single unbroken line since the accession of the so-called emperor Jimmu in 660 B.C. Japan's medieval military leaders, the shoguns, had been usurpers, and the Meiji Restoration had brought power back into the emperor's hands. T h e glorious emperor Meiji, latest in the imperial line, stood both as ruler of the nation and embodiment of all national goals. T o the Japanese people he was an absolute monarch in constitutional guise. Not only was he the political and military commander-in-chief of the empire, he was also the supreme arbiter of values, public and private — in short, both caesar and pope. Against this interpretation Kita wrote what others may well have thought, but were careful not to express. He contended that Japanese history is no chronicle of "loyalty and treachery" to the emperors. Medieval knights did not usurp power but represented instead a new stage of social evolution. And the Restoration falls into the same category: it restored nothing, he says, but constituted a step forward in the linear evolution of the Japanese state. Kita perceived three stages in the evolution of Japan's seitai or "form of government" and two stages in the evolution of its kokutai or "form of state." 17 Leaving the mists of prehistory, the first recognizable form of government in Japan was that of monarchy under the emperor, exactly as the kokutairon asserted. T h e Taika Reforms after A.D. 645 resulted in this system's rise to dominance. Meanwhile, the

26

I CHAPTER

TWO

comprehensive form of state was one of patriarchy. T h e emperor was supreme not only in the imperial household but he also "possessed" the land and people of the entire realm. Gradually a class of aristocrats arose who acted as patriarchs in their own domains, and a struggle ensued over the exercise of government power. After the establishment of the Kamakura bakufu in 1192, the form of government changed from monarchy to aristocracy, as warlords competed with one another all over Japan, but the patriarchal form of state persisted through the Kamakura, Ashikaga, and Tokugawa periods, since the rival military aristocrats — the daimyo — still acted as "possessors" of the land and people of their own territories. Drawing an analogy from European history during the Middle Ages, he suggests that after 1192 the emperor became "pope" of the Shinto religion, while the shogun acted as "holy Kamakura emperor" over a politically fragmented realm. T h e aristocratic form of government and the patriarchal form of state lasted until the Meiji Restoration. T h e "restoration revolution," as Kita almost invariably calls it, produced both a new form of government and a new form of state. It was actually a revolution in the guise of a "restoration." Far from marking a return to past institutions, it signalled an advance in Japan's evolution. By affirming the sovereignty of the state rather than of a monarch or an aristocracy, the Restoration created a kokutai that Kita calls the "kömin кокка" or citizen state. No individual or class "possesses" the land and people of Japan, as was the rule under the old partriarchal form of state. Instead, the nation, as it were, possesses itself. " T he present kokutai is not that of the age in which the state existed for the monarch's benefit, as his possession. It is the citizen-state

ANTI-KOKUTAIRON

| 27

kokutai in which the state is recognized as a legal person having actual human character . . . T h e subjects are not economic material existing as the 'great august treasure' under the emperor's right of ownership. They are subjects of the state, in the sense of having rights and duties vis-ä-vis the state . . . This is the present kokutai expressed in legal terms . . . It is socialism because sovereignty resides in the state, and it is democracy because power rests with the people." 18 In such a system the emperor and the people act as "organs" of the sovereign state, each with a separate role to play. T h e Meiji Constitution of 1889 consolidated this arrangement by providing for the election of a parliament made up at least in part of popular representatives. Because the new citizen-state kokutai and its adjunct, the democratic seitai, operated for the benefit of the people as a whole, Kita characterizes post-Restoration Japan as "legally . . . a social democracy." 19 Kita's interpretation collides head-on with the kokutairon — both its myth of a sacred line of emperors and its assertion of monarchic sovereignty. T h e emperor is not a god, Japan has no "unchanging kokutai," and the people should know better than to swallow such mythification. Under the heading " T h e Japanese people have all become imbeciles whose skulls have been crushed by the one phrase 'bansei ikkei' [eternal line]," he ridicules the public for its gullibility. " T h e kokutai and seitai of Western countries have evolved in accordance with historical evolution. But because the Japanese people have this 'eternal line of emperors,' they alone have sat immobile outside the law of evolution and have not evolved at all!" 2 0 Furthermore, the idea of Japan as one great family with the emperor at its head is scientifically absurd, Kita argues.

28

I CHAPTER

TWO

He denies Hozumi's theory of monarchic sovereignty by classifying the emperor as simply one organ of state. " Th e emperor of Japan is an organ who began and continues to exist for purposes of the survival and evolution of the state." 21 "It is clear that . . . when the emperor acts as chief administrative official or commands the army and navy, he does so as an organ." 22 The emperor is subordinate to the state, which is itself sovereign. On the face of it Kita's position strongly resembles that of Minobe Tatsukichi, Tokyo University professor of law who went far beyond Hozumi Yatsuka and others of conventional views by declaring that the state was indeed sovereign and the emperor one of the organs of the sovereign state. Yet Kita also attacked state-sovereignty theorists such as Minobe. T o understand why he did so, we must first review the process that led Minobe to develop his famous organ theory. Minobe studied in Germany at the turn of the century, working at Heidelberg University under the neo-Kantian legal scholar Georg Jellinek. On his return to Japan in 1902, he set to work applying the German theory of state sovereignty to the interpretation of the Meiji Constitution. Following Jellinek, he divided the concept of sovereignty into two categories.23 Theoretical sovereignty (. sh u k e n ; in German, Souveränität), which was indivisible, had always resided in the state. Under constitutional monarchy, however, the other category of sovereignty, designated by Jellinek as the practical power to rule (Herrschergewalt, or töchiken), came under the jurisdiction of the monarch. This power to rule was divisible into the several powers exercised in the name of the state, such as the power to declare war, to mint coins, and to collect taxes. In Minobe's view, the emperor

ANTI-KOKUTAIRON

29

of Japan "superintends" this power to rule and is therefore the "highest organ" of the state, standing supreme over all the other organs that actually carry out the various aspects of the power to rule. He based this interpretation squarely on Article IV of the Constitution: "The emperor is the head of state and superintends the power to rule." (Tennö wa kuni no genshu ni shite töchiken о söranshi.)24 He was able to argue that theoretical sovereignty lay with the state rather than the emperor because the framers of the Meiji Constitution, working in the eighteen eighties, had no knowledge of the distinction Jellinek would later make and so had nowhere in the document provided that the emperor must be the holder of shuken in addition to the practical "power to rule" (töchiken, which they had interpreted as identical to shuken). On the basis of this subtle theoretical distinction, Minobe broke through Hozumi's kokutairon interpretation of sovereignty and made the overall national interest paramount. All his life he opposed the arbitrary exercise of power by those who wielded the "emperor's prerogative," and his organ theory was clearly intended to frustrate such practices. Yet Minobe was an official scholar, and he failed to follow up the logical implications of his theory. By declaring the emperor the "highest organ of state," Minobe was not denying his place at the heart of the kokutairon ideology. He avoided coming to grips with this problem by classifying the kokutai as a historical, and not a legal, concept. 25 We have seen that Kita goes beyond him and rejects the kokutairon altogether. But this was not his only quarrel with the statesovereignty theorists. He disagreed with them on two other questions: the emperor as "highest organ," and the nature of the modern seitai or "form of government."

3 X A j i f ) Ф. (History of the military fascist movement). Tokyo: Kawade shobö shinsha fflffll1962. Hatano Yoshihiro. "Revolutionary Features of the Modernized Armies in the Late Ch'ing Period." Paper delivered at Conference on the Chinese Revolution of 1911, Wentworth-by-theSea, Portsmouth, N.H., Aug. 22-27, 1965. Hattori Shisö "Töjö seiken no rekishiteki kökei" ^ (Historical background of the Töjö regime); in Töjö seiken no rekishiteki kökei, pp. 117-163. Tokyo: Hakuyösha Й Ш ± , 1949. " K i t a Ikki no ishinshikan: Rönö ha to rönin h a " t—W. Hihan JVihon gendaishi 0 (A critical history of contemporary J a p a n ) . Tokyo: Nihon hyöron shinsha 0 ; £ l i f w f r ? ± , 1958. Nihon kindaishi jiten 0 (Dictionary of modern Japanese history). Tokyo: Töyö keizai shimpösha « i t , 1958. Nihon shihonshugi hattatsushi koza 0 ^Щ^^ШШШ^ШШ (Symposium on the history of the development of Japanese capitalism). 48 vols.; Tokyo: Iwanami shoten, 1932-1933. Nihonshi jiten 0 ^JfeS^Ä (Dictionary of Japanese history). Rev. ed.; Tokyo: Sögensha JflJ^ifc, 1960. Nomura Köichi S f t t t o - * . "Kokuminteki shimeikan no shoruikei to sono tokushitsu: O k u m a Shigenobu, Uchimura Kanzö, Kita Ikki" *HI Ж fit · f^l^f · ft —'Щ (Several types of national-mission ideas and their characteristics: O k u m a Shigenobu, Uchimura Kanzö, Kita Ikki); in Sekai no naka no Nihon i f t l 0 i f ( J a p a n in the world; Kindai Nihon shisöshi köza, Vol. 8), pp. 137-173. Tokyo: Chikuma shobö, 1961. "Profile of Asian Minded M a n I I : Ikki K i t a , " The Develop-

BIBLIOGRAPHY |

211

ing Economies, 4.2: 231-244 (June 1966). Norman, Ε. H . " T h e Genyosha: A Study in the Origins of Japanese Imperialism," Pacific Affairs, 17.3: 261-284 (September 1914). O k a Yoshitake |i3] Ü Ä . Yamagata Antonio: Meiji Nihon no shöchö ШШШ (Yamagata Aritomo: Symbol of Meiji J a p a n ; Iwanami shinsho, Vol. 311). Tokyo: Iwanami shoten, 1958. Ö k a w a Shümei AJII ЩЩ. Fukkö Ajia no shomondai ШШ^.Ш^.О (Problems of Asian revival). Tokyo: Daitökaku A ШШ, 1922. Ajia, Töroppa, Nihon Ш!В> (Asia, Europe, and J a p a n ) . Tokyo: Daitö bunka kyökai АЖ^С^ШгЦ·, 1925. Nihon oyobi Nihonjin no michi 0 if-Ж В оЁ (The way of J a p a n and the Japanese). Tokyo: Gyöchisha trift-fi, 1926. "Futari no Hokekyö gyöja: Ishiwara Kanji shögun to Kita ikki k u n " (Two devotees of the Lotus Sutra: General Ishiwara Kanji and Kita Ikki); Kaizo ijfcig (Reorganization), 32.12: 102-111 (November 1951). " K i t a Ikki kun о o m o u " (Recollections of Kita Ikki); Shin seiryoku, 3.12: 20-32(November 1958). Ököchi Kazuo A M И —Щ. Reimeiki no Nihon rödö undo ЩЩЩ gÖi±5E-fr-f Itagaki Taisuke ® i £ ü P j j Itö Hirobumi ( P B W X Iwata Fumio ^fflffüif e jihen Jiji gekkan NNW ® jiken "Jimmon chösho (Ökawa Shümei)" Ш И * ttÄ^

(*Л1ЯИЯ)

Jimmukai jitsugaku JiyOtö Ш ЙЗг! Jökyü Juntoku ЩШ kaibunsho Kaishintö Kaizösha Sfeiatt Kakumei hyöronsha ^Mfrifflmfi kakumeiteki daiteikoku kambun ШХ Kamoko ШШШ K'ang Yu-wei H W ^ Katö Hiroyuki M B & Z . Katö Takaaki ВДйЭД Katsura Tarö Kawakami Hajime M i S

220

GLOSSARY

K a y a n o Nagatomo lÜSfÄ^a kazoku : kazokushugi , keimö undo " K e k k i shuisho" Kempeitai & kengen

kenkyö Ketsumeidan iflSlHI kiken shisö fal^ffi-S kindai i S f t Kindai Nihon no kyojin hyakunin

tsuma kokumin no tennö, kokumin no Nihon & Kokumin shimbun @§;ffiffi Kokumin sösho HSÜit Kokuryükai ^* kokusui hozon Kokutai genri ha ( kokutai meichö undö

m шш&ш

"'Kokutairon' kankö no j o "

Kokutairon oyobijunsei shaka.ish.ugi kinka gyokujö & fit-EE £ K i t a Keitarö ft " K i t a no seichi Sado no motsu hangyaku kiiu" ft *£ \ < > K i t a Rokuröji ft Aßßfö Kita Shösaku ft f a i t Kita Suzuko ft V Kita Taiki ft K i t a Terujirö ft