Who are the citizens anyway?
some thoughts on Japanese civil movements after WW 2.
For the interseksi forum, 2002.8.12-14
Maho Sato, Japan Foundation
I don’t have any historical materials to prove it here today, however, apparently, the terminology and concept of civil, or citizen is a very foreign one to Japanese. However, in 90’s, or especially after 1995 when many different kinds of voluntary activities to support the victims of Kobe earthquake gained a wide social attention, we started to see the flourishing of the word civil society or citizen’s movement, denominating certain interest groups who usually have critical stance vis-à-vis government or cooperative sectors.
Here I am trying to explore several questions regarding the concept of civil or citizen, or civil rights as a means for people especially under the oppression of power holder, to achieve their political aspiration, introducing a few examples of social movements after the WW 2, which had significant impact on the thinking of democracy in Japan.
In 1991, a small but controversial, and historical symposium was held in Narita, with the participation of farmers and officials from the Ministry of Transport, to investigate the origin and process of misunderstanding and mistrust between the two parties regarding the construction of Narita airport. It was in 1966 when the government of Japan selfishly decided the site for the construction, without consulting the farmers and residents in that area. Since that time, anti-construction movement was organized and cotinued by farmers and outside activists, in the form of refusal of selling their lands, which had been a big obstruction to the extended development plan of this international airport. The conflict was tense and violent, and some farmers killed themselves because of the heavy psychological pressures coming from the tension. Through the dialogue of two parties, it was made clear that at the time of decision-making, government officials never felt the necessity to consult farmers who are the landowners, although their right to land is very essential and apparent one. After 3-years continuous discussions, finally the Ministry of Transport admitted their fault, and formally apologized for the farmers. Recently, government-run agency under the supervision of Ministry of Transport proposed a communal land use plan for organic farming in this area. For me, it looks as a great step forward, since government officials themselves admitted the underlying problem with their development-oriented ideology, especially if I think of many efforts and suffering those farmers had to go through, in fact not only farmers, but also intellectuals and artists who supported them. However, it can also be said that it took so long as 25 years, before the government sits together with farmers, to reflect on their policy and its consequences. However, this example I would like to describe as a process of peoples’ exercising their right to fight in front of unfair treatment by power-holder, the government, and their success albeit too pains-taking has to be followed.
Another example I would like to talk here is women’s lib movement in the early 70’s. They organized social campaign not regarding on big political issues, but on their own problems in daily life, such as removal of a ban over contraceptive pills etc. Day care centers for children, or asylum shelters for abused women were established during that time. I was reading on their writings recalling their experiences in 70’s, and was very much surprised to learn that many of them, especially many of the key figures, started their campaign out of the frustration over student movement in late 60’s. Student movements in Japan in late 60’s was influential nation-wide, firstly taking up the issue of un-democratic management of university, and later leading to more political campaigning of anti-security treaty conclusion with the US. Activists of women’ lib tell about how they were sexually harassed during their participation in this campaigning which sometimes involves night camping at campus etc. Some were raped, or forced to play a mother role, such as cooking etc. Some were disappointed by the comments of leading student activist saying the issue of gender is secondary, and should be taken up after this student movements succeeded.
As far as I read and learn, not only in women lib’s in Japan, but also all over the world, we can find similar stories in the experiences of feminist movements, or even in other form of political movements. People start their social or political campaigning and movements with specific missions and interests, however, soon some members among them realized their voice were not represented. In the feminist movements, Euro-American feminists met criticism from their comrades in Asia or in Africa, or from lesbian feminists etc. In a way, I assume it can be said that Indonesian independence movement also met the similar consequences and development: After independence was achieved, another power structure was constructed, regretfully in some parts copying that of the former colonial perpetrator. In this sense, I think the theory of Foucault (like in “The History of Sexuality”) is very illuminating, in his analysis of internal mechanism of power, where subjects themselves participate to reproduce discourses).
What I would like to argue here is that we should work hard to realize better political system where the vulnerable or deprived will have access to any kind of political channels to voice their problems and difficulties, and to change their predicaments. And such kind of process should be reflected upon the following reform of governing system of that society. But the question is, whose voice should be heard? My tentative answer is, there is no clear-cut measure to decide who (are the citizen or needs attention/support), and even if some political groups deserve attentions at one point in the history, such a political claim and categorization of social members requiring support, should be continuously contested and to be conceptualized differently according to the changing situation.
But equally important is, we have to continue our learning process to be sensitive enough, to hear the voices of people who are in the more deprived conditions, and to be (morally and emotionally) strong enough, to accept the political and social, or cultural aspiration of others even if they are in conflict with your own interests. Since, if I refer to the origin of the concept of civil, it connotes educated. For people to exercise their civil rights in a proper way, accepting the same rights of others, they/we have to be educated.