The Meiji Restoration

the singapore thing was really a gamble by the japanese, they knew they were outnumbered so they went around hoping to surprise them by catching them off guard

except the brits not only fell for it but overestimated the japanese numbers

japan did isolate itself, meiji restoration was reaction towards being forced from isolation by the americans, look up edo era if you want to see that it looked like

File: cuddihy_fig03b.jpg (32KB, 500x354px) Image search: [Google]

32KB, 500x354px

>>1779881
I've been reading about Commodore Perry and how the actions of the USA kick started this whole thing.

Are there any other examples of non-western societies reacting to Westerners in this way? The Japanese saw the technology and understood they had to reform if they had any hope of competing with it.

>>1779918
they also looked at time during that time as well seeing how they performed during the opium war
and no japan was an exception

>>1779938
looked at China*

>>1779938
This. They also understood perfectly how to exploit differences between europeans

>you will never live in a world where the rightful shogun crushed the insolent mori and shimazu rebels

>>1779965
Is Japan's involvement in WW1 a good example of this? They were doing so incredibly well until WW2.

>>1779966
I've been trying to imagine what such a world might look like.

The clans behind the Meiji Restoration were the same clans that were defeated at the Battle of Sekihagara.

Can you imagine that? Keeping your butthurt for 260 years, only to take revenge at the first opportunity? Only Japanese could be autist enough for that.

>>1780017
his allies had secret allegiance towards emperors cause including maeda the 2nd largest clan at the time, the shogunate was under threat since the balance was always precarious
the only reason why it didn't turn into sengokujidai 2.0 was because they decided to import parliamentary system

>>1780028
not tosa who were on the tokugawa side at sekigahara

>>1780017
and even before, in the 19th century they knew already how to play the catholic against the protestant, the british against the french and so.

File: slide-8.jpg (179KB, 1302x651px) Image search: [Google]

179KB, 1302x651px

>>1780028
>Only Japanese could be autist enough for that.

This idea is at the front of my mind while studying this topic. There seems to be something unique to the Japanese character that facilitated their ability to modernize and stand toe-to-toe with utterly alien civilizations up to that point in history. Pretty incredible.

>>1780034
>they decided to import parliamentary system

I understand they adopted a more or less parallel system to a constitutional monarchy based on Prussia's government. Does this have any link at all with Japan's attitudes towards Germany in the two World Wars?

>>1780017
fuggin militarist retards ruined EVERYTHING

>>1780069
i meant to quote >>1779966 oops

it didn't japan was willing to ally with anyone if they could gain some advantage, brits, us, france germany it didn't matter

>>1780071
We should've stayed content with 1910 borders. Fugging military got too greedy

>>1780097
now we only have animes to remember the best japan got.
not even the bubble era could compare.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mD25nzI35aE
;_;

>>1779872
Japanese person who learned about the restoration in Japan, ask me anything.

>>1780071
>>1780082

It strikes me as an enormous irony that the only non-western society to actually come up to par with the European powers ended up getting annihilated by European descendants and occupied by gaijin to this very day. I'd like to know what the average Japanese that is conscious of their history thinks of these circumstances.

I haven't looked into it but I can see the existence of reactionary groups in Japan that see Commodore Perry's expedition and the Meiji Restoration as the beginning of the end of their sovereignty as a nation.

File: Japanese_Empire2.png (30KB, 571x412px) Image search: [Google]

30KB, 571x412px

>>1780108
What was the reaction of the average Japanese citizen to these reforms? Did they embrace the idea of a public education system and a government modeled on the west?

One part of this that I find really interesting is the Satsuma Rebellion, effectively the final stand of the samurai class in Japan. Were there any other privileged or groups in the Japanese nobility that reacted violently as well?

How did the idea of the Japanese emperor as a walking god affect these societal transformations? Forgive me if this question is out of place, my prior knowledge on Japan is mostly limited to WW1 and WW2.

Thank you for your time.

>>1780116
no one could predict any of what happened from meiji to the atomic bombs but since they did stray out and act just like the europeans they made themselves a goal, they must covet resources and land just like the europeans. the fall of the europeans is the fall of japan cementing american domination
in a way after modernization they had to do something with their bloated army and navy they might have had better luck attacking usa

>>1780137
The japanese populace actually recieved the reforms with open arms, as they had seen what happened with china being gang-banged by colonial powers (including America). The feudal structure's dismantlement allowed for economic and social mobility, which was greatly appreciated.

On the resistance, the Clergy resisted, but not violently. However, like you said, the Samural were not happy. They were still privileged, but they lost their power. After the rebellion, they lost all of their privilege and power.

The emperor was a very modern man, and actually did not act like a god-king, but as a leader bringing Japan onto the world stage, and his power allowed for rapid modernization.

Hope I answered your questions!

>>1779872
>Why was Japan the only civilization and society that was able to understand the threat of Western imperialism and react to it in this way?
The other civilizations knew of the western threat but were often far too entrenched in the old system, especially in Qing China where Manchus had a very big stake in perpetuating minority rule.

> What made them take this approach instead of a strategy like the Chinese that tried to isolate itself?
The powerful lesson of the Opium Wars right across the water. Plus the shogunate was actually facing some very serious structural problems and intensifying peasant rebellions. Unlike China, there were relatively few people who actually had a real stake in the old system. These two combined made for a big push towards revolution.

>What might the world look like today if Japan tried to isolate itself instead?
Hard to say, but probably significantly poorer and less relevant. Likely not the huge cultural force it is today.

Actually taking a class on modern Japan this semester, and had to do a ton of research on Japanese imperialism last semester. I can answer more if you like.

>>1780188
>The emperor was a very modern man, and actually did not act like a god-king, but as a leader bringing Japan onto the world stage, and his power allowed for rapid modernization.

This stood out to me - what led to the emperor worship that stands out so distinctly in the WW2 era? Is this concept exaggerated in Western study or is the term "emperor worship" reasonably accurate?

>>1780254
>The other civilizations knew of the western threat but were often far too entrenched in the old system, especially in Qing China where Manchus had a very big stake in perpetuating minority rule.

I had never connected these two before, that makes perfect sense.

>Likely not the huge cultural force it is today.

Undeniable. Do you think this would still be the case if Japan did not involve itself in the two World Wars or is this too open-ended? Do you feel that Japan's influence today was facilitated or funneled in a sense from the US occupation?

>>1780271
>I had never connected these two before, that makes perfect sense.
It really explains a lot for China the more you look into it. The Manchus would constantly play off internal factions against each other with the net result of perpetuating their rule(however shaky) but overall weakness vs. foreign threats.

>Undeniable. Do you think this would still be the case if Japan did not involve itself in the two World Wars or is this too open-ended? Do you feel that Japan's influence today was facilitated or funneled in a sense from the US occupation?

Regarding the World War question, it is a bit open ended. Too many variables to be honest. As to your second question, I really think Japan's cultural influence today stems from the US occupation in a number of ways. The occupation broke the deepening slide into rural poverty that had been happening since the 1880s plus introduced a number of agricultural advancements(ie significant mechanization) that freed up labour to move to the urban centers. The rebuilding of the country with US backing well into the 60s and being largely free from defense spending obligations allowed for a massive economic boom that in turn spurred on a variety of cultural expressions that picked up a lot of steam.

Furthermore, the US occupation also removed a number of onerous Imperial laws such as the Peace Preservation Law which essentially allowed people to be arrested for thought crimes or belonging to undesirable political groups. Freed from this, Japanese society was liberalized in a major way which also helped their cultural influence grow.

>>1779872
>What made them take this approach instead of a strategy like the Chinese that tried to isolate itself?

Except it was the threat of getting JUSTED by America that made them stop isolating themselves.

China stopped being isolationist in 1850 after getting BTFO, similar to Japan.

The difference was that by then it was too late for them, and their empire of many different ethnic groups was incapable of reunifying.

>>1779938
>and no japan was an exception

China definitely attempted to modernize at least 3 times.

But it was too late for them by then.

>>1780356
>>1780364

From what I understand, most of China's attempts at modernization and industrialization were majorly set back during WW2. This is a subject I haven't heard much about, but seems especially relevant with China rising on the world stage today.

>>1779872
>>1779918

>Why was Japan the only civilization and society that was able to understand the threat of Western imperialism and react to it in this way?
The Turks, Ethiopians, Egyptians, and Chinese all tried to modernize...also the Japanese tried to isolate itself, even after the Meiji restoration. The Egyptians and Turks were widely successful but the British intervened to protect its interests in Egypt, and Russia always kept Turkey in check (losing ww1 also contributed to stagnation of this attempt). The Chinese, or rather the Ming (i think) were attempting it but were overthrown before they really even began.

>>1780466
>Ming
i meant Qing

>>1780466
The Qing only seriously embraced modernization efforts after the total disaster of the Boxer Rebellion. Seemed like a death bed conversion to be honest.

Everything else was either extremely limited or centered on individual efforts/specific regions and not a comprehensive national effort.

>>1780271
>what lead to the emperor worship that stood out so distinctly in the WWII era?

The military needed a justification for their actions, and so they built up the emperor into a god-king position, which let them do anything they wanted, even if the emperor disagreed, as he was at the mercy of the military.

I believe one often overlooked advantage Japan held over other non-Western powers was its relative unimportance to the West.

The Meiji Restoration occurred considerably after China already had the first Unequal Treaties imposed upon it. Other non-Western powers experienced similar problems during the 19th century. Japan on the otherhand, was left relatively alone until Perry.

Westernizing a nation is already an enormous undertaking and having external powers interfering at the same time only further hinders the process.

>>1780519
>>1780466
This. Mohammad Ali wasn't as successful in Egypt because of the British and French. China was too big and also had the British, French, US, and Dutch blowing shit up every time they tried something. And the Turks...well we all know what happened there...
On a related note, Japan had centuries of economic growth and very little of it had gone into the pockets of foreigners (China was too big and too fractured for its material resources to help, Egypt had a strong agricultural export trade but the wealth from that went to the British, and before that Ottomans, Romans, Greeks, etc, whether it be cotton or grain. Japan was culturally homogeneous (for the most part, relatively speaking really) and not a huge target for specific western interests, just a generic trade outpost.

>>1780509
>The Qing only seriously embraced modernization efforts after the total disaster of the Boxer Rebellion.
Nope.jpg. After the Taiping Rebellion.

It struggled because of corruption in the Qing court plus the Chinese cultural norm of rebelling like fuck versus a clearly collapsing dynasty.

>>1780587
The Qing did try modernizing after the Taiping Rebellion but it was very, very modest in scale and really concentrated in select sectors like mining, metalworking, arms, and some limited transportation. Governmental institutions were entirely unchanged with the exception off the creation of the Zongli Yamen(which had limited power anyways). It also had the flaw of being largely centered around the leading generals against the Taiping. Whenever they were posted to a new province, all the progress they had made(like modern arsenals) were ripped out of the ground and taken with them.

One really gets the impression that these modernization efforts they underwent in the 1860s-1870s were only to take as little as they could to drive off the foreigners. Either way it is nowhere near the scale of reform attempted post-1901, but by then it was too late.

>>1780584
As far as pre-contact Japanese economics go, one big advantage they had compared to the rest of their neighbours was their being fairly far down the road to a market economy.

File: 79687be31c850e3674297736e9a4986a.jpg (89KB, 474x750px) Image search: [Google]

89KB, 474x750px

Good thread.

It was only 1868 that the control of Japan was fully consolidated under the Emperor and Japan started to exist as a cohesive government. Yet within a few decades they would go to beat the Russians and regional powerhouse, China.

Japan placed a HUGE emphasis on their military, much more than any other government sectors because they wanted to be as powerful as other European nations. This is one reason why many Japanese soldiers tended to be very zealous and acted independently from orders. It didn't help the fact that all Japanese males had to perform conscription for more than 2 years and they had a choice of struggling with the civilian workforce or continuing in the prestigious military where they already had 2 years of experience in.

The empire soon became a bureaucratic mess with many different opinions and ideas on how to improve the empire. Some like Iwane Matsui believed vehemently in freeing and granting complete independence to all Asian nations, while others wanted them as satellite states.

I'm not saying that Japan didn't commit any war crimes, but Japan seemed quite alike other empires at that time. To discard the Japanese empire as completely evil is naive as many people worked for it to have the best intentions.

Japs are the Europeans of Asia. The born master race

>>1780646
Except for most of their existence they were backwards mongrels with a fractured political landscape. Ok I see what you mean now.

>>1780651

Just like the Europeans.

Savagery and nobility have a common root

>>1780645
>The empire soon became a bureaucratic mess with many different opinions and ideas on how to improve the empire.

Massive understatement. Reading up on Japanese imperial policy between say 1894 and 1945, it almost comes across as schizophrenic. Army, Navy, Cabinet, the ministries, the Genro, and hell even the toothless Diet all had strong opinions on which direction they should.

Its a real pain in the ass to read about, despite it being very interesting.

>>1780645

>It was only 1868 that the control of Japan was fully consolidated under the Emperor and Japan started to exist as a cohesive government.

Interesting. Was the rise of pan-Asian sentiment tied into the Meiji Restoration or did that come later?

I guess a better way to ask the question would be if the idea of Japanese imperialism only entered the Japanese consciousness after they were opened to the west, or if this was an idea that had already existed.

File: japanesemorningglory.jpg (88KB, 728x766px) Image search: [Google]

88KB, 728x766px

>>1780656
>Army, Navy, Cabinet, the ministries, the Genro, and hell even the toothless Diet all had strong opinions on which direction they should.

I was familiar with this division from what I know about Japan in WW2. The Army insisted on the Northern Expansion plan into Siberia while the Navy believed a Pacific empire was the best route for Japan.

What caused this? Was there a decentralized political and command structure? How was Hirohito controlled so well by these factions? From what I'm reading about the leaders during the Meiji era, these weren't pronounced issues. What happened?

>>1780611

The main difference between the Japanese and Chinese empires at that time was that due to the geographical nature of China, China felt it was natural to have many warlords. China is an empire of an extremely diverse people, up to now. What China had did was tolerate these warlords, that means bribing them, hoping they would side with their interest, etc. Meanwhile Japan only had one ethnic group, the Yamato people (otherwise, the Japanese people). Any desire for self-identify or special privileges were crushed (for example, the Satsuma rebellion).

Meanwhile the Qing Empire remained stagnant, and this stagnant way of managing the country meant having to rely on unreliable warlords to control the huge swaths of country and resources. Even during the rule of the KMT this persisted and it was common for warlords to side with Russia or Japan. To either be bribed by them or warlords just felt its political goals were aligned with theirs. Not really sure if he counts as a warlord, but Puyi would be an example.

>>1780669
>Meanwhile Japan only had one ethnic group,
muh ainu

>>1780657

The Meiji restoration happened in 1868, but there was still a lot of resentment and chaos leading up to 1877 (the Satsuma rebellion). I think most Japanese believed that the rest of Asia was 'lost' to the West at that point of time. It was only when Japan beat Russia in the Russo-Japanese war did the Japanese actually felt they had a real chance at a Pan-Asia (to whatever end).

>>1780703
>It was only when Japan beat Russia in the Russo-Japanese war

I had honestly forgot all about this earlier. It's one of those lesser known points of history is that monumentally important to what would take place in the next decades. Russia was utterly humiliated and realized it had to turn itself around, and Japan realized that it was on to something big and gave them the inspiration to try to take their place on the world stage.

>>1780657
I'd argue it entered Japanese consciousness after they were opened to the west. It did, sort of, exist prior to western opening but it was limited to the small handful of people had studied the books the Dutch brought - a very limited group of people as you can imagine.

Really though, it was their experiences under western power that shaped it. They came to understand quickly the magnitude of difference in power between them and the west, and that they had to carve out their own place in the world order or be subjugated. China was a very stark lesson - so stark that they too tried to carve out an imperial sphere in China quickly.

>>1780667
The political structure of pre-1945 Japan was rather odd. That had a parliament(Diet) but this only really controlled the budget. The cabinet was appointed(didn't have to be members of the diet either), and they were answerable only to the Emperor. Then there were the Army and Navy who were answerable to neither the Diet nor cabinet, but again the Emperor. This would give them a lot of leeway in pursuing their own goals. Finally, there was the Genro: an extra-legal body made up of the young men who had led the Meiji restoration. They didn't exist on paper anywhere but nonetheless handled the main state decisions up until WWI.

The military largely deferred to the civilian powers up until the end of WWI. They felt that they were losing influence, Japan getting weaker and the civilians not taking adequate charge, Japan not getting the spoils they felt they deserved from WWI, the Russian threat, opportunity with a weak China, a desire for autarky, etc. Its pretty convoluted and hard to pin down exactly. Either way, on top of all that I had listed they had both a penchant and precedent for unilateral action with no legal mechanism to restrain them. One thing led to another, and another, and another.

As to Hirohito, I'd have to read more about him to give you a better answer.

>>1779872
>What made them take this approach instead of a strategy like the Chinese that tried to isolate itself?
It didn't, it was isolationist until the black ships.

>Why was Japan the only civilization and society that was able to understand the threat of Western imperialism and react to it in this way?
It was more or less the complete opposite. Nearly every civilization saw outsiders as a threat as a standard policy. However in Japan merchants and clans like the Satsuma wanted to trade freely with the west, it was the central government that disallowed it, they didn't want them buying western weapons, using western navies and upsetting the balance of power, they also wanted to maintain their monopoly at the Dejma trading station.

This was the cause of a series of wars during which time Japan was flooded with imports due to "unfair" trade deals which prevented the central government from taxing trade as much as it wanted. By the time of the Meiji restoration when heavy tariffs were re-established the economy had been transformed.

China at the time was undergoing the Taiping rebellion and was too unstable to industrialize.

Thailand also maintained independence and attempted to modernize, but the tropical climate stifled progress.

>>1780716
>Japan not getting the spoils they felt they deserved from WWI

I know they picked up a few German colonies in China, and that two major pain points for the Japanese delegation at Versailles were their racial equality clause and for Europe to recognize their ambitions in China. The Japanese walked out on the conference after their demands were not met, setting the stage.

One perspective that I take away from this is how the modernization of Japan allowed them to even have the opportunity to attend a European peace conference and sit among them as "equals" which was unprecedented.

>>1780765
>It was more or less the complete opposite.

Very interesting perspective. Were the Dutch and Portuguese the main trading contacts pre-Meiji era Japan interacted with?

>>1780833
Yes, their participation in Versailles was certainly a noteworthy accomplishment. Its hard to say which demand was too much for the other Allies to expect, but the Japanese were really demanding a LOT in China that the Europeans could never recognize.

>Were the Dutch and Portuguese the main trading contacts pre-Meiji era Japan interacted with?
Just the Dutch, and Chinese too I suppose. They traded with the Portugese and Spanish in the Sengoku period but under the Tokugawa they grew tired of the Portugese and Spanish attempts to spread Christianity. The Dutch were tolerated because they didn't care for evangelizing people and were content to simply trade.

>>1780833
The Portugese were expelled in the 17th century. The Dutch and Chinese were the sole trading contacts until the black ships.

>interesting perspective
A realistic perspective. The western imperialist colonialists were evil I'm sure, but they didn't have the power to force random Japanese merchants to buy things, they did that on their own volition. Native industries only suffered when their Japanese customers could buy things cheaper from foreigners, to the benefit of the customers, while trade and technology opened up more opportunities for economic growth elsewhere.

The view that foreign trade often involves some kind of conspiracy to ensare the economy is very spurious. I don't understand it and haven't seen a valid explanation for it. I am guessing the idea is some rich people bribe local politicians or something, but nothing like that remotely happened in Japan.

It looks like this thread could be the place for me to ask for help.

I'm trying to find again a old (1910s? 1920s?) Japanese political song I once heard on YouTube, but that seems to have vanished.

The refrain was something like

>there will be reform
>there will be democracy
>and if they don't
>then we will have dynamite! BOOM!

Anyone knows of it?