Fukuzawa Yukichi's Bourgeois Liberalism
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
CRITICAL POLITICAL THEORY AND RADICAL PRACTICE Fukuzawa Yukichi’s Bourgeois Liberalism The Betrayal of the East Asian Enlightenment Minhyuk Hwang Critical Political Theory and Radical Practice Series Editor Stephen Eric Bronner Department of Political Science Rutgers University New Brunswick, NJ, USA The series introduces new authors, unorthodox themes, critical interpreta- tions of the classics and salient works by older and more established think- ers. A new generation of academics is becoming engaged with immanent critique, interdisciplinary work, actual political problems, and more broadly the link between theory and practice. Each in this series will, after his or her fashion, explore the ways in which political theory can enrich our understanding of the arts and social sciences. Criminal justice, psy- chology, sociology, theater and a host of other disciplines come into play for a critical political theory. The series also opens new avenues by engag- ing alternative traditions, animal rights, Islamic politics, mass movements, sovereignty, and the institutional problems of power. Critical Political Theory and Radical Practice thus fills an important niche. Innovatively blending tradition and experimentation, this intellectual enterprise with a political intent hopes to help reinvigorate what is fast becoming a petrified field of study and to perhaps provide a bit of inspiration for future scholars and activists. More information about this series at http://www.palgrave.com/gp/series/14938 Minhyuk Hwang Fukuzawa Yukichi’s Bourgeois Liberalism The Betrayal of the East Asian Enlightenment Minhyuk Hwang Department of Political Science Rutgers University New Brunswick, NJ, USA Critical Political Theory and Radical Practice ISBN 978-3-030-21529-3 ISBN 978-3-030-21530-9 (eBook) https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-21530-9 © The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020 This work is subject to copyright. All rights are solely and exclusively licensed by the Publisher, whether the whole or part of the material is concerned, specifically the rights of translation, reprinting, reuse of illustrations, recitation, broadcasting, reproduction on microfilms or in any other physical way, and transmission or information storage and retrieval, electronic adaptation, computer software, or by similar or dissimilar methodology now known or hereafter developed. The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this publication does not imply, even in the absence of a specific statement, that such names are exempt from the relevant protective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use. The publisher, the authors and the editors are safe to assume that the advice and information in this book are believed to be true and accurate at the date of publication. Neither the publisher nor the authors or the editors give a warranty, express or implied, with respect to the material contained herein or for any errors or omissions that may have been made. The publisher remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. Cover illustration: © Ekely / Getty Images This Palgrave Macmillan imprint is published by the registered company Springer Nature Switzerland AG The registered company address is: Gewerbestrasse 11, 6330 Cham, Switzerland PREFACE East Asia has fascinated many political scientists throughout the twentieth century. At first, scholars wondered how once poor islanders in the far end of the East, who only recently had left behind the feudal tradition, defeated the powerful Baltic Fleet of the Russian Empire. Only a few decades later, the same islanders dared to attack the United States and waged a war against the whole world. Further, the countries in East Asia, all of which were burned to ashes by a series of devastating wars until 1950, miracu- lously built powerful economies and nation-states within a few decades during the latter half of the century. The conclusion from the various analyses of the so-called “miracle” in East Asia seems to be uniform—it was due to the “revolution from above.” The powerful authoritarian gov- ernments in East Asia effectively created incentives for their industrious and docile people to work harder and create an economic surplus. While political scientists were focusing on this reactionary form of moderniza- tion, the progressive spirit in East Asia, which was the true motor of their limited success, was forgotten and silenced, except by the highly special- ized intellectual historians of East Asia. The great intellectual struggle of the East Asian enlightenment, which I will introduce in this book and hope to explore in more depth in the future, is never mentioned as an important issue in political theory courses in universities. In fact, few intellectuals are big fans of the Enlightenment in general. Intellectuals around the world have become increasingly pessimistic about human reason and political progress based on it. The Enlightenment has been accused, often unjustly, of being “bourgeois,” “imperialist,” or even “totalitarian” because it represses the unique experiences of subjectivity in v vi PREFACE favor of the Eurocentric conception of rationality. In this situation, politi- cal theorists have a responsibility to reexamine the concrete political achievements and challenges created by the Enlightenment philosophes’ belief in the power of reason. The global rise of alt-right movements ironi- cally provides a unique opportunity for intellectuals in the ivory tower to reconsider their vehement attacks on human reason in recent decades. The message is clear: we still need rationality and universal principles to make judgments about subjective claims. Listening to marginalized people’s authentic sentiment alone will not solve anything—white supremacists’ fear of white genocide may be an authentic expression of their sentiment, but no rational person would agree with their worldview. However, despite the growing interest in rehabilitating the Enlightenment tradition and its emancipatory effect, scholars of the Enlightenment have ignored how non-Western civilizations actively reacted and even contributed to the idea of enlightenment. It seems that Western political theorists only show an interest in Asian thinkers when they suggest something that is the polar opposite of the Western tradition, often reaching conclusions that are only skin deep, such as “the West is based on individuals while the East privileges the collective.” Focusing on cultural purists in the East only creates unnecessary confusion and irrecon- cilable division. To avoid such mistakes, one should first identify the nature of the non-Western enlightenment thinkers, who accepted Western modernity with urgent and concrete political practice in mind, but with- out completely departing from their own tradition. Admittedly, Fukuzawa Yukichi may have been one of those who were “biased” toward Western modernity and the Enlightenment tradition and was often considered a “westernizer.” Yet the seriousness and urgency with which he had to face the challenge of a totally different civilization surpassed what modern comparative political theorists have to deal with. As I will explain in this book, Fukuzawa had to reconsider the whole sys- tem of epistemology and ontology in the Confucian tradition. The gravity of the matter at hand led him to “betray”—a term that everyone who has kindly read my work has questioned—the progressive cause of East Asian enlightenment, which I believe would serve as a profound lesson for any Western political theorist. Fukuzawa may not represent the entirety of the East Asian enlightenment, but he was certainly present at its beginning. Moreover, the Japanese enlightenment led by Fukuzawa, both its progres- sive ideals and its betrayal of East Asian unity in favor of imperialism, has posed a great problem for Korean and Chinese thinkers up to the present. PREFACE vii One of the most important, and quite legitimate, criticisms of this book is that it leaves out the discussion of the material conditions that led to Fukuzawa’s so-called betrayal. It was no coincidence that A Critique of Current Affairs, a notorious essay in which Fukuzawa publicly declared his betrayal of the progressive cause, was published in 1881, the year of the first serious financial crisis in Meiji Japan. The rampant inflation wors- ened the poverty of poor farmers who were already suffering in the midst of the political instability, leading to widespread peasant revolts all over the country. The wealthy proto-bourgeois merchants who supported the reform of the feudal government became defensive and no longer sup- portive of democratic reforms in fear of the influence of the Freedom and People’s Rights Movement. Witnessing the instability of the whole nation, Fukuzawa, like many other former liberals, shifted his position and became increasingly conservative. What I have tried to illuminate in Fukuzawa’s betrayal, however, is his concrete political choice based on his own political theory. Supporting Japanese imperialism was not the only remaining option for Japanese lib- erals. Fukuzawa could have been conservative and pacifist at the same time—after all, it is inconsistent to believe that you need to have peace at home but wage a war abroad, which I will discuss at length in Chap. 5. What I was interested in was the reasons behind a “progressive liberal” becoming a staunch guardian