Fascism in Japan
Without fascism, there would be no Japan. Or without fascism, would there be a better Japan?
Fascism promotes political violence and war. It emphasizes on “nation before self” and believes that so long as the nation prospers, so will the people. Before Japan adopted this policy, it came across a spread of others that included national isolation, fukoku kyohei, democracy, finally fascism. Fukoku kyohei, a policy similar to fascism, was adopted during the Meiji period. This built the foundations of fascism in Japan. However, it was replaced by democracy in the Taisho period as a change of approach to Japanese politics. Nevertheless, fascism still dominated Japan eventually in the Showa period. This is what proves fascism gained more acceptance and hence, a higher possibility of benefitting the Japanese.
But how do we know whether fascism really benefitted Japan? By saying that it is beneficial encompasses such a broad area, whether in terms of economic, political, social, or physical well-being. In this case, we consider it as benefitting Japan as a whole, and only in the context of Japan. Benefits do not only include superficial advantages like monetary statuses or growth in power, but those that hold deeper meaning such as social development and well-being.
With fascism, Japan managed to flourish like cherry blossoms in spring. Democracy failed the Japanese and lost their trust, and fascism, in any way, seemed like a better choice. Fascism portrayed itself as powerful and aggressive, giving the Japanese people a higher sense of security and higher reliability. In terms of military power, they would grow rapidly to become a respected great power, unlike the inferiority they suffered under the democratic government. Intense training for the young also meant a more promising population always ready to defend the country and building a national identity. All these benefits were further precedented by an economic boost to the country with fascism brought about
Fascism promotes political violence and war. It emphasizes on “nation before self” and believes that so long as the nation prospers, so will the people. Before Japan adopted this policy, it came across a spread of others that included national isolation, fukoku kyohei, democracy, finally fascism. Fukoku kyohei, a policy similar to fascism, was adopted during the Meiji period. This built the foundations of fascism in Japan. However, it was replaced by democracy in the Taisho period as a change of approach to Japanese politics. Nevertheless, fascism still dominated Japan eventually in the Showa period. This is what proves fascism gained more acceptance and hence, a higher possibility of benefitting the Japanese.
But how do we know whether fascism really benefitted Japan? By saying that it is beneficial encompasses such a broad area, whether in terms of economic, political, social, or physical well-being. In this case, we consider it as benefitting Japan as a whole, and only in the context of Japan. Benefits do not only include superficial advantages like monetary statuses or growth in power, but those that hold deeper meaning such as social development and well-being.
With fascism, Japan managed to flourish like cherry blossoms in spring. Democracy failed the Japanese and lost their trust, and fascism, in any way, seemed like a better choice. Fascism portrayed itself as powerful and aggressive, giving the Japanese people a higher sense of security and higher reliability. In terms of military power, they would grow rapidly to become a respected great power, unlike the inferiority they suffered under the democratic government. Intense training for the young also meant a more promising population always ready to defend the country and building a national identity. All these benefits were further precedented by an economic boost to the country with fascism brought about