Determinism regarding cultural inertia in Japan (AHC: less institutional xenophobia, sexism, etc. in Japanese society)

[Pipcard]

(formerly titled "Cultural inertia regarding Japan")

2021-06-15 - Alternate history challenge:

Even though Imperial Japan was defeated in WWII, institutional racism and sexism are still prevalent and major criticisms of Japan. So this is the alternate history challenge I have been recently wondering about: what kind of PoD is needed for Japan to have a society that is more tolerant of foreigners, and more gender-equal in the 21st century? It could still have a dark, imperialist past, but one that is more open to change by protests, civil rights movements, and other kinds of social reform. As well as unequivocal apologies for past atrocities.

Could the PoD be after WWII, or in the 20th or 19th centuries? Or does it need to be before or during the Sengoku period, resulting in no Sakoku/"closed country" policy? Does it require that Japan be colonized, or be an entirely different country starting from ancient history, like the post from CalBear [mentioned below]?

What do you think about these notions of an unchangeable, status-quo-based, "deep seated" or "entrenched" culture within Japan?

That Japan had a xenophobic society and culture that didn't start with Tokugawa and "Sakoku," but came straight from the Jomon and Yayoi periods, and cannot possibly be changed unless they are completely colonized?

Any thoughts on altering Japanese attitudes towards immigration?

I was thinking the Japanese government is willing to do some tough political things and lets in a whole bunch of, say, Hong Kong Chinese in the 1980s as a calculated attempt to get needed capital & deepen ties to China. A rapid influx of non-labour immigration might provoke a backlash in the beginning, but it may also break the ingrained, if mild, racist attitudes that the Japanese hold.

Once you let in a bunch of Chinese allowing Japanese descended South Americans is the next step, and after that I imagine South Koreans followed by other Asians & probably English speakers from the Commonwealth/USA is next.

That said, I'm not sure how plausible this is. It would require the government to be willing to stick through with unpopular reform, and it would need a fairly fast adaptation of Japanese culture. Not impossible, but there'd to be a solid reason—my current one is simply the government looking at birth rate trends and having some guts.

Sure, no problem at all. Simply reverse 30 centuries of culture and tradition in a stroke. You are planning to recreate an economy basis by the addition of a Central bank (which in itself would be a massive shift in the Japanese economy and would likely stifle the conditions that allowed the economic miracle in the first place) so changing the deep seated traditions of an entire people should be simple.

Things don't change that easily, not in the short term. Want to effect a cultural change? Try eliminating the Tokugawa bakufu around a year after the battle of Sekigahara and allowing the Portuguese to take over the Islands. Better yet, allow the Mongol invasion to succeed.

Things don't change because they would be nice, or simply to create a "happier" future. I would be delighted if Hong Kong was still British, and if Macau was still Portuguese. I would be even happier if the PRC was a liberal democracy, unfortunately, that simply isn't in the cards.

[...]

Altering the Japanese cultural traditions governing outsiders will be at least an order of magnitude harder than altering the economy. It isn't that the Japanese do not understand the outside world (their business leadership probably understands foreign markets better than many of their local competitors understand their own neighbors), nor do they fear it; either of these would be easy to alter, it is that the culture as a whole likes the way things are and sees no reason to change. The people didn't see the need to change pre-Bubble, during the Bubble, or after the Bubble. Japan is a homogenuos society, it has been for at least two millenia, and like most such societies it will not change in a generation (or six).

Or the idea that Japanese militarism and expansionism is always inevitable with no other option because of their "samurai warrior culture":

Japanese militarism is the byproduct of japanese culture, history, traditions and religion. You cannot butterfly away militarism while keeping centuries of samurai tradition, shintoism, a divine emperor and all this stuff.

As I had posted my another thread asking about how Japan can become the fabled "technologically advanced society" as thought of in the 1980s (and for a while after the popping of the bubble), this 1999 article claimed that the lack of reforms and lag in innovation within Japanese businesses happened because they became complacent during the post-war miracle. But might we actually need a POD stretching far back in time in order for Japanese businesses to be more accepting of risk-taking, innovation, and adoption of new technology?

 

[BellaGerant]

What do you think about these notions of an unchangeable, "deep seated" or "entrenched" culture within Japan?

That Japan had a xenophobic society and culture that didn't start with Tokugawa and "Sakoku," but came straight from the Jomon and Yayoi periods, and cannot possibly be changed unless they are completely colonized?



Or the idea that Japanese militarism and expansionism is always inevitable with no other option because of their "samurai warrior culture":



As I had posted in another thread, this 1999 article claimed that the lack of reforms and lag in innovation within Japanese businesses happened because they became complacent during the post-war miracle. But might we actually need a POD stretching far back in time in order for Japanese businesses to be more accepting of risk-taking, innovation, and adoption of new technology?

Bah, expansionism's as inevitable as it was for any other country with the means to do so. No Japanese nation held land outside of the Japanese islands until the 19th century. They tried once in the 16th century and, having lost that, retreated back to the islands for another 260 years. If it's inevitable for the Japanese, so is it too for the Spanish, Americans, Russians, etc. The emperor, tradition, history, all excuses for conquest for any country that wants to expand. For 'God, gold, glory.' Strong nations conquer, weak nations get conquered or bow. You can't base a whole culture's military attitude on 100 years of 3000 years of history.

 

[Manman]

The area is an island that is very much the same ethnic group. No other place has that much of the same except china and china is to big to not be affected by the outside world. Japan can isolate itself and no one would care.

 

[PhilippeO]

i think not, Japanese had success until 1980s, so they can't change their successful recipe. Japanese hardly the only one who can't change. US Midwest stuck at Manufacturing, Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth stuck to 'wheat is King', Venice stuck at Medditerranean trading. Its entirely difficult to change direction of society once it had been set.

 

[Faeelin]

Japan would never accept ideas from the outside world. Look at how they resisted Buddhism or reforming in the 19th century.

 

[longsword14]

reforming in the 19th century.

That dire a need is also not going to happen short of a severe meltdown.

 

[Pipcard]

Japan would never accept ideas from the outside world. Look at how they resisted Buddhism or reforming in the 19th century.

Considering the absolutism in this post, weren't you the one to complain about the idea that Japanese ultramilitarism is an absolute inevitability but Nazism can be averted?

The Japanese become some sort of AH kilrathi, who only scream and leap. But the dudes who put six million Jews in gas chambers? Oh, there are so many ways for them to become a force for good in the welt.

 

[Fabius Maximus]

Or the idea that Japanese militarism and expansionism is always inevitable with no other option because of their "samurai warrior culture":

I don't think that's necessarily true: with the exception of the Korean invasion, feudal Japan didn't really go in for foreign conquests, so blaming Japanese expansionism on samurai culture seems incorrect. Post-Meiji Japanese expansionism owed more to what one might call the social Darwinist approach to international relations then current than to any inheritance from their samurai past, and, whilst the country did end up going in a hyper-militaristic direction in the 20s and 30s, this was largely a response to the social and political pressures the country was facing at the time.

 

[RodentRevolution]

Considering the absolutism in this post, weren't you the one to complain about the idea that Japanese ultramilitarism is an absolute inevitability but Nazism can be averted?

Erm unless I read

Japan would never accept ideas from the outside world. Look at how they resisted Buddhism or reforming in the 19th century.

Very wrong I rather got the impression that Faeelin was being sarcastic. I suppose one or two of the in jokes will fly over people's heads unless they know something of the history of Japan

So perhaps this link to a brief history of Japanese Buddhism and perhaps a quick glance at the Meji period might show how Faeelin had tongue in cheek

 

[TRH]

I don't think that's necessarily true: with the exception of the Korean invasion, feudal Japan didn't really go in for foreign conquests, so blaming Japanese expansionism on samurai culture seems incorrect. Post-Meiji Japanese expansionism owed more to what one might call the social Darwinist approach to international relations then current than to any inheritance from their samurai past, and, whilst the country did end up going in a hyper-militaristic direction in the 20s and 30s, this was largely a response to the social and political pressures the country was facing at the time.

If anything, the obvious inspiration for Japanese imperialism in the 19th and 20th centuries would be, well, Western imperialism going on at the same time. They wanted to borrow our best practices, and that seemed to be one.

 

[Pipcard]

Erm unless I read


Very wrong I rather got the impression that Faeelin was being sarcastic. I suppose one or two of the in jokes will fly over people's heads unless they know something of the history of Japan

So perhaps this link to a brief history of Japanese Buddhism and perhaps a quick glance at the Meji period might show how Faeelin had tongue in cheek

I know about that, but I thought they weren't being sarcastic as they were talking about the initial "resistance" to new ideas. The Boshin war, for example. But if they were, I guess I need a better sarcasm detector.

 

[Faeelin]

If anything, the obvious inspiration Japanese imperialism in the 19th and 20th centuries would be, well, Western imperialism going on at the same time. They wanted to borrow our best practices, and that seemed to be one.

What do you mean? Japan annexes territories. Britain brings order.

 

[BBadolato]

What do you think about these notions of an unchangeable, status-quo-based, "deep seated" or "entrenched" culture within Japan?

That Japan had a xenophobic society and culture that didn't start with Tokugawa and "Sakoku," but came straight from the Jomon and Yayoi periods, and cannot possibly be changed unless they are completely colonized?



Or the idea that Japanese militarism and expansionism is always inevitable with no other option because of their "samurai warrior culture":



As I had posted my another thread asking about how Japan can become the fabled "technologically advanced society" as thought of in the 1980s (and for a while after the popping of the bubble), this 1999 article claimed that the lack of reforms and lag in innovation within Japanese businesses happened because they became complacent during the post-war miracle. But might we actually need a POD stretching far back in time in order for Japanese businesses to be more accepting of risk-taking, innovation, and adoption of new technology?

Both ideas are complete bullshit. The Japanese conducted trade with the outside world, and even adopted outside philosophies and technologies, all without colonization, be it Buddhism, Christianity, gunpowder and some western confections. The only reason Japan largely cut off contact under the Tokugawa, is that the Tokugawa had a very fragile system of government where they relied on keeping the various clans of the various domains and even their peasantry pacified. Before the Tokugawa and even Toyotomi Hideyoshi, Japan was immensely decentralized with the emperor as a figurehead, to the Shogun, who relied on the support of the daimyo. However, that could break down to the point where you could have figureheads all the way down to daimyo with the real power in hands of their retainers.

As for Samurai warrior culture, and an inevitable militarism. The Japanese only invaded Korea because of the fact Toyotomi Hideyoshi, was only a peasant and could not become Shogun, there are theories he was also carrying out Nobunaga's legacy, however both Hideyoshi and Nobunaga before where outliers and not the norm. The Samurai themselves never became a "true" warrior class until the Tokugawa mandated it, and that was more to keep people in line. Before that, yes you had Samurai but they were not a strict warrior class, you could have farmer samurai or samurai becoming monks and ninja. Samurai also used guns and there was no Bushido as an idealized code. Samurai were just as treacherous in the Sengoku period as anyone else, anything telling you otherwise is idealized propaganda.

If you want to look at where Japan "went wrong" you can't blindly attribute recent mindsets to vague "historical tradition"s and chances are those "traditions" are false.

 

[Pipcard]

Both ideas are complete bullshit. The Japanese conducted trade with the outside world, and even adopted outside philosophies and technologies, all without colonization, be it Buddhism, Christianity, gunpowder and some western confections. The only reason Japan largely cut off contact under the Tokugawa, is that the Tokugawa had a very fragile system of government where they relied on keeping the various clans of the various domains and even their peasantry pacified. Before the Tokugawa and even Toyotomi Hideyoshi, Japan was immensely decentralized with the emperor as a figurehead, to the Shogun, who relied on the support of the daimyo. However, that could break down to the point where you could have figureheads all the way down to daimyo with the real power in hands of their retainers.

As for Samurai warrior culture, and an inevitable militarism. The Japanese only invaded Korea because of the fact Toyotomi Hideyoshi, was only a peasant and could not become Shogun, there are theories he was also carrying out Nobunaga's legacy, however both Hideyoshi and Nobunaga before where outliers and not the norm. The Samurai themselves never became a "true" warrior class until the Tokugawa mandated it, and that was more to keep people in line. Before that, yes you had Samurai but they were not a strict warrior class, you could have farmer samurai or samurai becoming monks and ninja. Samurai also used guns and there was no Bushido as an idealized code. Samurai were just as treacherous in the Sengoku period as anyone else, anything telling you otherwise is idealized propaganda.

If you want to look at where Japan "went wrong" you can't blindly attribute recent mindsets to vague "historical tradition"s and chances are those "traditions" are false.

I think the issue is not just about accepting foreign ideas, but foreign people and their talent, which is said to be a reason why Japan lost their technological competitiveness to Silicon Valley.

One answer may lie in immigration. Silicon Valley attracts talent from around the world, whereas Japan keeps tight limits on immigration.

In some years, more engineers have moved to the United States on H1-B visas than have graduated from American universities, said David Weinstein, chair of Columbia University’s economics department.

“To get some sense of the impact of immigration in high tech, imagine what would happen to Silicon Valley if every U.S. tech company fired all their foreign-born workers,” said Weinstein, who teaches about the Japanese economy. “U.S. leadership would collapse.”

And according to CalBear, it is almost impossible to change that attitude unless Japan is colonized or you have a POD "30 centuries" back.

Also, how do you think this can be changed?

Japan’s lack of cultural diversity and the high value it places on social conformity prevent the kind of independent thinking that has led to world-changing companies common in Silicon Valley, said Sung Won Sohn, a professor of economics at Cal State Channel Islands. “In Japan, you get rewarded for being an organization man, not an independent like Steve Jobs,” he said.

 

[takerma]

Idea that Japan is not an innovative society not open to new products, ideas and tech is.. Crazy? Nuts?

There are tons of areas in basically everything where Japan is a leader in innovation or close. Pop quiz where is cryptocurrencies have the most use? Go to Tokyo take a look at products in any category, starting from fashion to cars, to robots. Selection is massive. Japanese market is very open to new things being introduced.. look at something obscure like mountain climbing. Japanese shop will have more stuff of different variety then anywhere in US. There is like 1 company that created any meaningful innovation in layering for high output activities in the mountains in last 20 years. They are full line production from design to making materials to sewing based in Kobe.

Look at the robotics advances that were needed to find Fukushima "missing" molten reactor core.

etc etc smartphone camera lenses etc etc

Japan’s lack of cultural diversity and the high value it places on social conformity prevent the kind of independent thinking that has led to world-changing companies common in Silicon Valley, said Sung Won Sohn, a professor of economics at Cal State Channel Islands. “In Japan, you get rewarded for being an organization man, not an independent like Steve Jobs,” he said.

Idiot basically. See all of the innovative companies and businesses Japan created in last 100 years.

 

[Monter]

Most of Asia was colonized and I don't see so much innovation, let alone "migrant friendly" environment in most of those, in fact immigration to SK as almost as tight as Japan's, being colonized is more likely fuck up Japan than improve it.

As for the "30 centuries part"..

 

[takerma]

Even the immigration is mostly bullshit. It is much easier to bring in qualified people to work in Japan then to US, Canada or EU. MUCH easier.

Lets say you are my buddy, you are a good developer and I want to get you hired by the company I work for in Tokyo. I talk to HR, they talk to you.. they call company that does the documents. Couple month later welcome to Tokyo. None of the idiotic H1B nonsense.

They don't let in refugees though, like at all. Engineers, businessmen, hookers all welcome to come.

 

[kasumigenx]

What about Lowland Luzon remaining Muslim, would that mean that the Muslims would continue to march north and what would be the effects of continuous Muslim contacts to Japan's culture.

 

[Tripledot]

The area is an island that is very much the same ethnic group. No other place has that much of the same except china and china is to big to not be affected by the outside world. Japan can isolate itself and no one would care.

Neither Japan nor China are anything close to being culturally homogeneous.

 

[General Tirpitz]

As for Samurai warrior culture, and an inevitable militarism. The Japanese only invaded Korea because of the fact Toyotomi Hideyoshi, was only a peasant and could not become Shogun, there are theories he was also carrying out Nobunaga's legacy, however both Hideyoshi and Nobunaga before where outliers and not the norm. The Samurai themselves never became a "true" warrior class until the Tokugawa mandated it, and that was more to keep people in line. Before that, yes you had Samurai but they were not a strict warrior class, you could have farmer samurai or samurai becoming monks and ninja. Samurai also used guns and there was no Bushido as an idealized code. Samurai were just as treacherous in the Sengoku period as anyone else, anything telling you otherwise is idealized propaganda.

This. Bushido, as it is understood today, was mostly created during the late 19th and early 20th century. We can mostly thank Nitobe Inazō’s Bushido: The Soul of Japan that the idea of Japanese having some special innate samurai quality became so common abroad.

If we look at how Japan has adopted foreign innovations and ideas, there are numerous examples from history. Faeelin already mentioned the initial arrival of Buddhism and the great modernization efforts during the 19th century. Just to give few other examples, you had the arrival of new Buddhist doctrines to Japan during the the 12th and 13th centuries, most importantly Zen and Pure Land Buddhism among them. This is actually the period when lay Buddhism started to become a thing instead of just being something the elites dabbled. During and after Hideyoshi's adventures in Korea you also had a flood of Korean influences to Japan, especially in artistic fields. In addition, you also had Rangaku (“Dutch/Western learning”) scholarship of Tokugawa period, which increasingly became a mainstream of Japanese scholarship by the early 19th century. After 1869 the pace in cultural changes becomes so quick that it would hopeless to attempt to chronicle them here. Besides more nativist periods during the 1880's and militarist periods, you also had these periods when western influences flooded Japan, like the 1870's, 1920's and following the defeat in the WW2.

The second post quoted in OP mentioned Shintoism and a divine emperor also as an obstacles to prevent Japanese militarism. It should be noted though that Shinto, as understood today, was mostly created by few kokugaku (“national learning") scholars during the 18th century and the new Meiji government which found their ideas useful later, when it attempted to unify the nation and create an organized national religion, just like many western nations had. Pretty much nobody read Kojiki until Motoori Norinaga, a kokugaku scholar during the 18th century, and his friends became obsessed with the text and convinced that Japan is the land of gods.

The Emperor’s status has changed during the centuries. He certainly was venerated by the people, at least those of who knew he existed (not always the case in feudal societies), but his status and role were just as crafted by the new government as was that of Shinto. The Emperor institution itself also experienced changes between 1869 and 1945, so it wasn’t a constant.

To sum it up, the idea of unchanging Japan since time immemorial is a cultural construct which both westerners and Japanese themselves have found useful when attempting to explain the nation's successes and failures.