日本式アナキズムの本質Essence of Japanese-Style Anarchism

One of my personal favorite philosophies is anarchism. However, when I say anarchism, I don’t mean it in the ideological sense involving social movements or the dismantling of government structures, but rather anarchism in its essential meaning. In Japan, this has historically been translated and rooted as museihu-shugi (無政府主義), or “government-less principle,” and due to this, the historical Japanese analysis of anarchism has been extremely poor and unreliable. Therefore, through examining the history of anarchism’s impact on Japan from a philosophical viewpoint, I’d like to deepen our understanding of what a true anarchist really is.

In Japan, anarchism as a philosophy was introduced from Western Europe from the late Meiji to the Taisho period, and it was historically accepted as a significant branch within the broader socialist movements, especially flourishing during the Taisho era. The early socialist movements during the Meiji period in Japan began by simultaneously embracing a diverse array of thoughts—not only Marxism, British and American social reformism, but also anarchist ideologies from Russia and France, as well as state socialism—thus differing considerably from the Western contexts. This characteristic of simultaneously incorporating various influences reflects a historical pattern seen in Japan’s reception of Buddhism and Confucianism, which were also effectively “remixed” upon introduction, quickly transformed into uniquely Japanese thoughts, beliefs, and doctrines.

Among these diverse influences, the Russian revolutionary thinker Pyotr Kropotkin had an enormous impact on contemporary Japanese intellectuals and activists. Kropotkin’s influence introduced the concept of direct action to Japan’s radical intellectuals, significantly transforming the course of modern Japanese history from the Meiji era onward. For example, Shusui Kotoku (幸徳秋水, 1871-1911), a socialist from the Meiji period who would later become central to various social movements, deepened his intellectual insights through correspondence with Kropotkin. These letters, written during the period when Kotoku was increasingly drawn toward anarchism and direct action, vividly illustrate how direct contact with foreign anarchist ideas profoundly stimulated Japanese thinkers. Kotoku also undertook the translation of Kropotkin’s writings, playing a pioneering role in introducing anarchist principles to Japan through Western ideas. Thus, by the end of the Meiji period, Western-originated anarchism had rapidly penetrated Japan’s intellectual circles and was embraced within the context of the Taisho era’s movements for freedom, civil rights, and socialism.

Initially, Shusui Kotoku, an activist affiliated with the socialist group Heiminsha (平民社), had aimed for parliamentary social reform. However, after advocating anti-war positions against the Russo-Japanese War of 1904-1905 and being imprisoned as a result, he encountered Kropotkin’s writings in prison, which profoundly influenced him, leading to a significant ideological shift towards anarchism. After his release in 1906, Kotoku traveled to the United States, where he engaged with American labor movements. Upon his return to Japan, influenced by his experiences abroad, he started advocating direct action, rejecting reliance on parliamentary politics. At that time, Kotoku and his comrades published radical ideas widely in Japan through outlets like the Heimin Shimbun (平民新聞). Their radical activities inevitably aroused governmental suspicion, ultimately culminating in an incident of profound historical significance leading up to the events of World War II.

This event was known as the Taigyaku Incident (大逆事件). In 1910, during the late Meiji period, Shusui Kotoku and numerous anarchists and socialists were simultaneously arrested under suspicion of plotting the assassination of Emperor Meiji. The government considered the alleged plot to assassinate the emperor as “high treason” (大逆) against the state and sentenced twelve individuals, including Kotoku, to death. All were swiftly executed at Ichigaya Prison. However, it later became clear that this was entirely fabricated by the government, and the accused had never engaged in any such conspiracy. Furthermore, the trials were held secretly, and the evidence and procedural legitimacy were fabricated and riddled with contradictions. It is now widely recognized that this incident was deliberately orchestrated by the government as justification to suppress anarchism and eliminate perceived threats to the state. In fact, one of those executed—Dr. Seinosuke Oishi (大石誠之助, 1867-1911), a physician from Shingu City in Wakayama Prefecture—was officially recognized as having been falsely accused and posthumously granted honorary citizenship over a century later, in 2018. I previously visited the site of his birthplace and offered prayers there. Dr. Oishi himself was a remarkably intriguing figure, and I plan to write about him separately in the future if I have the opportunity.

The fact that the Taigyaku Incident was effectively ideological oppression by the government left lingering resentment that eventually led to the militaristic excesses of the early Showa era. The impact of this event was profound, delivering a devastating blow to the socialist and museihu-shugi (無政府主義) movements that had been active during the Meiji period. After the incident, the government banned socialist organizations and publications, and established and heavily reinforced the Special Higher Police (特別高等警察) to rigorously control ideological activities. This forced intellectuals of the time into silence, marking a pivotal turning point as Japan gradually descended into a tense atmosphere. Known as the greatest miscarriage of justice orchestrated by the modern Japanese state, the Taigyaku Incident would profoundly shape the subsequent era of the Taisho period, where the power of civil society significantly expanded.

It was within this new context that a figure I deeply admire emerged: the thinker Sakae Osugi (大杉栄, 1885–1923). Osugi had long been an ally of Shusui Kotoku but escaped execution because he was imprisoned for another incident at the time. Fully understanding the true nature of the incident, Osugi resolved to carry on the legacy of his deceased friend and took the lead in reviving anarchism in the Taisho era. As the Taisho period unfolded after World War I, a new wave of activism known as “Taisho Democracy” began to flourish, revitalizing the labor and peasant movements, which had temporarily quieted, and causing anarchism to reemerge after seemingly having been extinguished.

Born in 1885, Osugi initially received military training in his teens but soon deserted, later joining Kotoku’s Heiminsha in Tokyo, committing himself as a devoted activist in the socialist movement. When Kotoku became influenced by the Russian Socialist Revolutionary Party and turned towards direct action, Osugi followed suit, embracing this approach. Even after losing his mentor Kotoku in the Taigyaku Incident, Osugi continued his revolutionary activities despite repeated imprisonment and releases, eventually becoming an essential driving force for anarchist thought.

During the late 1910s and early 1920s of the Taisho era, Osugi rose to prominence as a leading thinker in the Japanese anarchist movement. He founded a syndicalist study group in 1913, and in 1914 revived the publication of Heimin Shimbun. Ideologically, he emphatically argued that “the liberation of the individual is the foundation of all social liberation,” strongly advocating rebellion against authority and power, while prioritizing individual freedom. For some reason, however, this point is still widely misunderstood in Japan; Osugi’s thought never explicitly advocated dismantling the government. Instead, his emphasis on individual liberation within the context of anarchism is often overlooked. This oversight may stem not from Western anarchism, as commonly presumed, but from Confucianism deeply embedded in Japanese cultural tradition.

The conventional perspective contrasts Kotoku, who grounded his ideas in a Confucian sense of justice, with Osugi, who is often described as adhering to French-style individualism. Yet during that era, all intellectuals, Osugi included, were influenced by a variety of Western ideas, philosophies, and academic disciplines. In fact, what Osugi sought was a unique form of anarchism centered on the vitality of life and individual dignity. Curiously, Japan continues to label Osugi as a “museihu-shugisha (無政府主義者),” literally a “government-less ideologue,” which remains perplexing.

I cannot comprehend why, in Japan, Osugi continues to be linked with the ideological anarchist demanding governmental dissolution. Possibly this confusion arises because intellectuals failed to grasp the complex integration and maturity resulting from Western anarchism’s deep interplay with Japan’s historical thought traditions. Although anarchism indeed entered Japan from the West during the Meiji period, there existed an original form of what might be called “Japanese-style anarchism” already during the preceding Edo period. Without understanding this earlier tradition, it is impossible to fully appreciate why Osugi interpreted anarchism not as a social or national movement, but as a fundamentally individual matter.

An essential concept to understand this “Japanese-style anarchism” is jihan (自反), a vital philosophical principle articulated by Edo-period Confucian scholars. Next time, we will delve deeper into this notion of jihan, exploring its philosophical significance in the thought of Sakae Osugi and examining its implications during the Taisho era.