Going Retro in Japanese Education?

the_80sWhat do leg warmers, Wham, and this NYT article on Japanese education all have in common? A very 1980’s vibe.

There is a lot to like about Michael Fitzpatrick’s article, starting with its premise that I share: that a leading democracy should teach the history of its past human rights violations in its history textbooks. And the quotes by Thomas Berger and Mindy Kotler are right on.

The article has a retro feel because today’s efforts by Japanese conservatives to foster national pride remind one of similar efforts thirty years ago.  In the 1980s, empowered by resounding LDP electoral victories, Japanese conservatives sought to increase “patriotism” and “defense-mindedness.” And like today, they did so in response to a worsening threat environment (then it was the Soviet Union), American encouragement for burden-sharing, and an ideological affinity for becoming a more “normal” great power.

There’s one discordant note in the article’s retro vibe. It seems to imply (with the term “state-sanctioned textbooks”) that the Abe government is imposing conservative textbooks on Japanese schools. This is misleading.

Thirty years ago, Japan’s conservative leaders could, and did, interfere with history education content. Ministry of Education (MoE) screeners used to censor discussion of wartime human rights violations in history textbooks. This came to light in part from reporting in Japanese newspapers (hat tip to today’s embattled Asahi Shimbun) and from the activism of Japanese scholar and textbook author Ienaga Saburo.

The exposure of MoE censorship created domestic and global outcry, so the Japanese government changed its policy. Going forward, the MoE would screen only for accuracy —  i.e., screeners could not reject a book on the basis of content.

Liberal authors won because this allowed them to discuss past atrocities (which liberal scholars like Ienaga believe are important for students to learn). But it goes both ways: conservative authors (who believe that discussion of atrocities harms patriotism) are free to NOT write about those topics, and the MoE cannot reject their books for content they lack (as long as the content that they do discuss is accurate).

As the NYT article suggests, in today’s domestic and regional climate, I have no doubt that conservative authors are seeking (and will get) MoE approval for textbooks that omit discussions of wartime atrocities. And I have no doubt that many conservative elites support such books. (Whether or not those books get adopted, however, is up to the schools.) Finally, as the article was smart to discuss, I agree that the way Japan remembers its history and educates it young people has important foreign policy implications.

Today’s efforts by Japanese conservatives to build patriotism do feel like a return to the 1980’s. But it’s also important to recognize changes in Japan’s education policy since then: changes that give freedom of expression to both liberals and conservatives.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *