SDHF Newsletter No.314 Why Does the U.S.-Imposed Constitution Continue to Frame Japan as a Nation? By Jason Morgan
Why Does the U.S.-Imposed Constitution Continue to Frame Japan as a Nation?
By Jason Morgan
The real face of the present Constitution of Japan is, as described by Professor Jason Morgan: “Drafted on the assumption of Western civilization superiority, the postwar Japanese constitution is not an artifact of Japanese political will or self-determination, but a monument to what is arguably America’s greatest hour of military glory.”
The Constitution is largely unchanged since 1947 because historical context and the emergent alliance system locked it in place. The context of the Japanese constitution is that one Asia-Pacific empire, Japan’s, fell entirely under the power of another empire, America’s.
However, I think there is another important factor which blocks the amendment of the American-imposed constitution: it is that the Japanese, especially intellectuals, academics and journalists, accept the very notion or assumption of the superiority of Western civilization. This whole-hearted acceptance is really wrong, a racially insensitive slur disguised as a universal truth.
As Professor Morgan writes, the crusading Americans imposed other constitutions on other defeated peoples long before 1945. Perhaps most famous is the “Bayonet Constitution” foisted upon King David Kalākaua of the Kingdom of Hawai’i in 1887. Like the Japanese constitution, the Hawaiian constitution was drafted entirely by Americans, and in less than one week. The United States dispatched governors-generals to the Philippines and imposed constitutions, twice, upon its colony.
American academics hold the same belief in the superiority of the West. A recent example is their attitude toward Harvard University Professor Ramseyer’s article on the Japanese military “comfort women”. In his article, “Contracting for Sex in the Pacific War,” to be published in the International Review of Law and Economics, he verifies that comfort women made contracts, of three to five years, with the owners of the comfort stations and received cash advances. More 3,500 American academics signed a letter demanding that the article be withdrawn. These academics have yet to demonstrate proof of “forced conscription” or coercion was used to “force” then to work as comfort woman. These so-called academics have also failed to demonstrate that the “brutal and criminal” Japanese military, as standard practice, “forcibly conscripted” and “coerced” women into prostitution. The academics’ high-mindedness betrays their so-called anti-racist and diverse outlook. Really, these academics are childishly self-centered.
MOTEKI Hiromichi, Acting Chairman
for KASE Hideaki, Chairman
Society for the Dissemination of Historical Fact