英文摘要 |
Since the 1990s, there has emerged a tide of nationalism in Japan referred to as new or 'neo nationalism.' Characterized by resentful feelings and negative recourses such as historical revisionism, this tide of nationalism has exposed two shortcomings of previous understandings of Japanese nationalism that need further examination. Expanding on Rogers Brubaker's institutionalist approach, this study maintains that Japan should not be seen as a given nation-state constituted by highly homogeneous ethnicity and culture; rather, we should examine what kinds of institutions have constituted the Japanese nation since World War Two. In making this claim, this paper analyzes the causes of resentment in contemporary Japanese nationalism by investigating institutional legacies left by the U.S. authorities during the Occupation Period from 1945 to 1952. The United States left the so-called 'Peace Constitution' in civic-territorial institutions, on the one hand, and the so-called 'Tokyo Trial view of history' in ethnocultural institutions, on the other. These two institutional legacies planted seeds of resentment in Japanese society that, accompanied by the incompleteness and inconsistency of the Occupation reform, eventually fostered the growth of nationalism in the postwar era. In light of Max Scheler's theory of Ressentiment, this paper then analyzes the resentment behind the discourses made by contemporary nationalists. As resentment causes value-shifts and transvaluations, these nationalists can hardly judge things in fair terms; as a result, they tend to bear distorted views of history that eventually lead to historical revisionism. The analysis also unearths the structures of feeling that can be called 'multi-layered Ressentiment' in the East Asian region that deserve further examination in future studies. |