A History of Japan: From Stone Age to Superpower (49 page)

However, fortunately for the new regime, the threat did not materialise. Christianity simply did not catch on, and was never to appeal to more than 1 per cent or so of the population. Even when it did appeal to potentially influential Japanese, it was often ‘Japanised’ by being made more flexible and stressing selected values such as duty and hard work.
⁴⁴
Before long Japan was able to proclaim to the west that it was perfectly happy to welcome Christianity, safe in the knowledge that it wasn’t really going to prove a problem.

More of a problem were the non-Christians who were involved in the ‘freedom and human rights movement’ (
jiy
minken und
) that was developing in the 1870s and early 1880s.
⁴⁵
By 1880 there were some 150 local popular rights societies. The following year the Liberal Party (
Jiy
t
) was founded – Japan’s first major political party. And just a year later a second major party was formed, the Constitutional Reform Party (
Rikken Kaishint
), calling for a British-style constitution and parliament.
⁴⁶

Nor did those in the movement forget the promise by the government in 1868 to work towards establishing a national assembly. By the end of the 1870s the League for Establishing a National Assembly claimed to represent around 130,000 members nationwide. There was a widespread interest in politics at the time, reflected not only in the popularity of novels with a political theme but also in numerous ‘home-grown’ suggestions for a new and proper constitution.
⁴⁷

The democratic movement was not a simple one. It undoubtedly contained a genuine element of desire for a more democratic form of government. Some of this was driven by grand ideals and visions. It also contained an element of frustration towards the government leaders, who kept power to themselves – in the emperor’s name – and were blatantly an oligarchy (rule by a few). Some of this, by contrast, was driven by self-interest and pragmatism. Both the founders of the two major parties, Itagaki Taisuke (1837–1919) and Okuma Shigenobu respectively, had been part of the government, but neither was from Satsuma or Ch
sh
and both had personal ambitions and frustrations among their motives.
⁴⁸

The oligarchs were not deaf or totally unsympathetic to the various messages. They knew, whether they liked it or not, that democracy had to make an appearance. Such an appearance would have political value not only in impressing the western powers but also in dampening anti-government sentiment. But it all had to be done at a controlled pace and
only within certain limits – ideally as an appearance that did not necessarily match the substance, in a time-honoured Japanese fashion. It had to be democracy on the oligarchs’ terms, an ‘authoritarian democracy’.

Management of a self-contradiction was no easy task, and it did not always go smoothly. Eventually, however, aided by a longstanding Japanese ability to bring together conflicting elements as well as a Tokugawa period tradition of ‘freedom within limits’, a balance of sorts was achieved. Often that balance took the form of almost simultaneous acts of repression and liberalism.

In 1875 the government introduced harsh laws to curb freedom of speech. Yet the same year the emperor again promised that a national assembly would be formed, and the government agreed to establish a senate for the discussion of legislative matters, to establish the forerunner of the Supreme Court, and to hold a conference of prefectural governors. The governors’ conference led within a few years to the introduction of the principle of election to office in prefectural assemblies. The right to vote in these elections was restricted, as was the power of the prefectural assemblies. Nevertheless these bodies, first convened in March 1879, were the first ‘popularly’ elected political bodies to operate successfully outside the western world.
⁴⁹

In 1880 another harsh, undemocratic law was passed. It restricted public meetings, and prevented the unauthorised involvement in politics of people in certain occupations, such as policemen, teachers, students, and soldiers. And yet, almost immediately afterwards the government allowed the formation of two major political parties. And in 1881 It
again promised there would be a national assembly and a new constitution. This time he gave a specific indication when this would happen – within ten years.

But in a classic display of authoritarian democracy the constitution was not to be left to the public, despite their many constructive suggestions. It
obtained imperial authority to draw the thing up by himself.

If there was going to have to be a constitution, It
wanted it to be on German/Prussian lines, not the British lines preferred by Okuma. A Prussian-style constitution would retain considerable power for the emperor (or those advising him) and limit party involvement in cabinets. German influence already prevailed in the military, under the control of Yamagata Aritomo, and was also to prevail in the legal code.
⁵⁰
The general mood of the government leaders was pro-German, and not as pro-British as was commonly believed.