Japan to teach patriotism to children

misa.j · 18 Dec 2006

TOKYO, Japan (AP) -- Japan's conservative government chipped away at two pillars of the country's postwar pacifism, requiring schools to teach patriotism and upgrading the Defense Agency to a full ministry for the first time since World War II.

The measures, enacted Friday in a vote by Parliament's upper house, form key elements of Prime Minister Shinzo Abe's push to bolster Japan's international military role, build up national pride and distance the country from its post-1945 war guilt.
Full article

When Japan's prime minister Shinzo Abe's background being a nationalist was publicized, it gave me an impresion that there would be changes which would bring an oppression to the society. Teaching patriotism to children will only narrow their awareness on global issues, which has been much needed in Japanese education for so long.

If this propaganda is one of Abe's measures to gain his popularity, which has fallen over the perception that he has not paid enough attention to domestic issues, he is making a big mistake. I hope more voices of opponents are heard and this "reform" be reconsidered.

shiroma · 18 Dec 2006

The problem of pious communists in general is that they belive that they are the only "enlightened" chosen ones and openly mock the rest of the population when preaching their dogma, instead of "let's think together" persuasive approach.
Notice how often they use the word "should."

It is understanable that they want cultural cleansing to destroy everything Japanese in the name of "progressive" "conerned citizens" in order to achieve the revolution, but their methods do not look very sophistiated.

Related thread

Goldiegirl · 18 Dec 2006

I don't think teaching patriotism is all bad. Sometimes I feel that there isn't enough patriotism. I think it's sad when I am at a baseball game and no one around me places their hand over their heart for the national anthem. I don't think it is wise to teach just patriotism. Education should be well rounded and students need to know about other countries and their cultures. I can't tell from the article if this is bad for Japan or not. I think it will depend on just what they are going to teach; what they are going to include, or exclude from their history.

Elizabeth · 18 Dec 2006

If this propaganda is one of Abe's measures to gain his popularity, which has fallen over the perception that he has not paid enough attention to domestic issues, he is making a big mistake. I hope more voices of opponents are heard and this "reform" be reconsidered.

I don't know what to say except to remind the people that rhetoric like this, of indoctrinating a love of "beautiful Japan" by recreating a "mythical shining country on a hill" etc, were lines he used countless times during the campaign.
Along with promising to continue the visits to Yasukuni, to restore a strong and vital defense force among other Koizumi-era "reforms."

Japanese politicians, generally speaking, don't mind showing their contempt for citizens who continue to elect them without serious and due consideration. With unending scandals and corruption cases my opinion sorry to say usually isn't a lot higher. ☝

Japan_Observer · 18 Dec 2006

He never made an unambiguous promise to visit Yasukuni; in fact, he's been deliberately vague about the whole deal, whether because it has enabled him to patch up relations with China and South Korea, or whether because his conservative credentials are solid enough that he doesn't feel the need to placate ultra-rightists, or most likely, some combination of the two.

In any case, the worst thing about the education reform bill is not so much what's in the bill -- the practical impacts of which are as of yet unknown -- but that it was a wasted opportunity for Japan to bring its education system into the twenty-first century. Every developed country -- the US included -- has to consider how to reform its education system to prepare its children for a world of rapid and ongoing change. Japan had a chance to set an international precedent, and it failed.

shiroma · 18 Dec 2006

Japan_Observer said:
Japan had a chance to set an international precedent, and it failed.

That "intelligent" poster had better make an easy phone call MEXT +81(3)5253-4111 to question them to check the real original law article paragrphs before expressing a superb opinion. I called them already.

Toru Ranryu · 18 Dec 2006

Japan_Observer said:
In any case, the worst thing about the education reform bill is not so much what's in the bill -- the practical impacts of which are as of yet unknown -- but that it was a wasted opportunity for Japan to bring its education system into the twenty-first century. Every developed country -- the US included -- has to consider how to reform its education system to prepare its children for a world of rapid and ongoing change. Japan had a chance to set an international precedent, and it failed.

What kind of reforms were you hoping for exactly?

Japan_Observer · 18 Dec 2006

I'm not expert enough on education policy to list specific reforms, but the goal of education in developed countries has to change. For too long education has served to purposes of industrial economies: the goal has been to produce workers who can be plugged into a large organization and contribute in a relatively static, hierarchical setting.

That won't do anymore, as developed countries move from industrial to post-industrial economies -- and find that even as they go through the painful process of moving to serviced-based, post-industrial economies, they are joined by late-starting developing countries like China and India, who are rushing right through industrialism to post-industrialism.

So the prevailing mode of education in developed countries must change as economies change. It isn't simply a matter of teaching the same things better -- the focus of usual discussion of education reform in most countries -- but of changing what is taught and how it is taught. Probably the biggest change needs to be thinking in "skill sets": corporations and governments do, why not schools too? The walls separating subjects need to be broken down at all levels, and students need to begin learning to see the web of connections between all areas of life. And they need to have strong communications skills. The abysmal failure of the American school system, at all levels, to create students who can clearly and cogently express their thoughts in written or oral communication will dog the US as its economy becomes increasingly based in the manipulation of words.

As far as Japan is concerned, the Abe reforms move the focus of Japan's education system in the opposite direction of where it should be going. Rather than focus on parochial patriotism and national traditions, Japan needs to be helping to shape global citizens, who are more comfortable in international settings than previous generations. They need to be more comfortable learning and using foreign languages (English, but others too [Chinese?]). I don't object prima facie to an education system that includes the inculcation of patriotism as one of its goals -- one of the purposes of a public school system is, after all, to imbue children with society's values -- but in this case, Abe's reforms seem out of touch with society.

Japan is changing, there's no question about that. Rather than using education reform to institutionalize resistance to change, it should be used to encourage and mold social change.

Gentleman10 · 18 Dec 2006

The question I would really like answered is what will these nationalism classes be like?
In the worst case scenario, one could easily imagine a teacher with a megaphone shouting "March! 1 2 3 4!" with the Jstudnets raising their arms "Hail Japan!", but on the other hand, I think people could be blowing this a bit out of proportion as opposed to the reality. In many cases, words like "nationalism" can alarm us when we know the country has an aggressive war history, yet I think there is a certain level of "nationalism" within every country. Because we haven't focused yet on whether or not Japan is specifically extremely nationlistic or not (and from what I can tell, it's not much different from many other countries), it would be unfair to say that these laws will be for Japan's ultimate detriment.
As an American, I see the word "nationalism" as a different word for " being patriotic". For all we know, it could be simply doing things like saying their country's pledge in school (we do this in American schools, is this common for other countries?). People usually identify proudly as being an American here, and we celebrate our Independence Day etc. While the US may have its share of a nasty past full of discrimination, war, and atrocities, we stil pridefully celebrate the country we are... so why shouldn't any other country not be allowed to as well?

Kinsao · 18 Dec 2006

I think kids should be taught a realistic and balanced view of their home country - about its history, in both the good and the bad. IMO teaching the facts is the important thing, and for kids to learn which were the bad things their country did, and why these were bad, what were the consequences, what are the lessons learned, etc... and also the good things, and be proud of those good things while not thinking their home country to be "perfect".

Toru Ranryu · 19 Dec 2006

Some countries are more perfect than others

Kinsao said:
I think kids should be taught a realistic and balanced view of their home country - about its history, in both the good and the bad. IMO teaching the facts is the important thing, and for kids to learn which were the bad things their country did, and why these were bad, what were the consequences, what are the lessons learned, etc... and also the good things, and be proud of those good things while not thinking their home country to be "perfect".

Do you think the English get taught about the bad things their country has done?

Elizabeth · 19 Dec 2006

Gentleman10 said:
The question I would really like answered is what will these nationalism classes be like?
In the worst case scenario, one could easily imagine a teacher with a megaphone shouting "March! 1 2 3 4!" with the Jstudnets raising their arms "Hail Japan!", but on the other hand, I think people could be blowing this a bit out of proportion as opposed to the reality.

There are already suggested curriculum guidelines in place across the country, that recommend and encourage students be graded on the degree to which they demonstrate love of country, patriotism, or at the least strong interest in Japanese culture and history. All of which has caused a great deal of controversy and led only a very small minority of schools to adopt.

So I can't imagine mandating it through law making any more of a measurable difference aside from the issues it has managed to avoid addressing, such as college required courses not being offered in secondary schools, social problems of bullying and suicide, not bringing standards in line with other developed countries and on and on....

Mikawa Ossan · 19 Dec 2006

Gentleman10 said:
The question I would really like answered is what will these nationalism classes be like?

As I understand it, this new legislation doesn't require the imposition of a new class specifically to teach nationalism to students. It can be done in a much more subtle manner. A deeper focus on Japanese culture and history in the regular curriculum, for example. Establishing more traditional Japanese culture based clubs at school. Starting up something akin to the Pledge of Allegience in America. Playing Kimi ga Yo before school. There are many ways to try to instill a stronger sense of nationalism in the school system.

misa.j · 19 Dec 2006

Japan_Observer said:
They need to be more comfortable learning and using foreign languages (English, but others too [Chinese?]).

Not only that, but they need to be comfortable in their learning environment to start with; give them more time for discussion; encourage them to question their teachers; give them assignments require research and critical thinking simultaneously; all those areas are very weak in Japanese education and needed to be emphasized, so the students don't just clam up when the opportunities are given in different settings.

Gentleman10 said:
The question I would really like answered is what will these nationalism classes be like?

I don't think the method really matters since their goals are "to cultivate an attitude that respects tradition and culture, that loves the nation and home country" "The new education law will allow children to acquire a good understanding of their heritage and become intelligent and dignified Japanese", which are nothing new basically though the words are carefully chosen and have been taught and talked about in schools for decades.

The very important fact that often forgotten is that children are vulnerable and susceptible to what they hear and learn, and schools should never be a place for teachers to thought control them.

Kinsao · 20 Dec 2006

Toru Ranryu said:
Do you think the English get taught about the bad things their country has done?

I was writing about what I think should be taught, not what is necessarily taught in English schools.

Mycernius · 20 Dec 2006

Toru Ranryu said:
Do you think the English get taught about the bad things their country has done?

With modern day PC agendas everywhere, yes they are. The English are becoming an oppressed majority in their own country when it comes to certain points.

Gentleman10 · 20 Dec 2006

misa.j said:
I don't think the method really matters since their goals are "to cultivate an attitude that respects tradition and culture, that loves the nation and home country" "The new education law will allow children to acquire a good understanding of their heritage and become intelligent and dignified Japanese", which are nothing new basically though the words are carefully chosen and have been taught and talked about in schools for decades.

Is this a bad thing...? Last time I checked, saying your country's pledge never hurt anyone

[/QUOTE]
The very important fact that often forgotten is that children are vulnerable and susceptible to what they hear and learn, and schools should never be a place for teachers to thought control them.[/QUOTE]

Hmm, does this mean that teachers will be giving a slanted view about Japanese history (ie, Nanjing never happened, Japanese people are supposed to be in power etc?), becuase that be a problem.

misa.j · 20 Dec 2006

I read between those lines. Loving one's country should be a spontaneous emotion insead of being told to do so.

Gentleman10 said:
Hmm, does this mean that teachers will be giving a slanted view about Japanese history (ie, Nanjing never happened, Japanese people are supposed to be in power etc?), becuase that be a problem.

It's hard to say how much power teachers have, but it seems like the state is able to impose what it thinks is a correct attitude for children to have for the nation.

Apparently, it was revealed that the town meetings held by the government for the purpose of hearing opinions from ordinary citizens, instead they planted questioners who praised the government for this change.

Elizabeth · 20 Dec 2006

Apparently, it was revealed that the town meetings held by the government for the purpose of hearing opinions from ordinary citizens, instead they planted questioners who praised the government for this change.

The number of hoax town meetings related to this bill was very small, maybe 5-15 maximum. The undeniable fact is the platform this agenda is based on couldn't have been clearer during the campaign and still it is the result of a majority consensus, whatever Abe's current popularity.

I do agree, though, ironically enough with the emphasis on parental and home education that could work to balance or even counteract an increasing emphasis on civics education or blatent thought control.

yukio_michael · 20 Dec 2006

During high school, we were made to stand each morning and recite the "Pledge of allegiance."

Many of you are familiar with this, but from wiki:

he Pledge of Allegiance is a promise or oath of allegiance to the United States as represented by its national flag. It is commonly recited in unison at public events, and especially in public school classrooms, where the Pledge is often a morning ritual. In its present form, the words of the Pledge are

I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, and to the Republic for which it stands, one Nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

According to current U.S. custom, as codified by the United States Congress, persons are expected (but not legally required) to recite the Pledge as follows:

by standing at attention facing the flag with the right hand over the heart. When not in uniform men should remove their headdress with their right hand and hold it at the left shoulder, the hand being over the heart. Persons in uniform should remain silent, face the flag, and render the military salute.

We had some issues with having being expected to recite this, specifically because of the inclusion of the line, "one nation, under god", which we thought improper in a school setting. Some of us, under no duress, simply chose to sit during the pledge.

I think there is difference between patriotism, and nationalism. One should be proud to be a part of a country from which they were born, regardless of the struggles it may face... I know that it's not currently in vogue to be American, what with the wretched government we have now, but the tide is turning, as it always has, and once again, we may be seen as a charitable and helpful nation, not an ostracizing one full of hubris.

I'll remind people also that almost all countries history books omit facts as they see fit. School has always been a place not just for education, but also, for socialization of young people--- Indoctrinating them into the mores of any particular society.

We have to distinguish between was is simply patriotism, and what is dangerous nationalism... And what do we mean by "dangerous"...?

Toru Ranryu · 20 Dec 2006

Kinsao said:
I was writing about what I think should be taught, not what is necessarily taught in English schools.

I understand that, and basically I agree with what you wrote. I just think it's important to take a moment to think about whether this is a uniquely Japanese problem or if other countries have a flawed view of their own history as well. It's ridiculous for a bunch of foreigners to sit here on a message board criticizing Japan without reflecting on how their own country deals with similar issues. "And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother's eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye?"

And anyway my question was honestly meant. I have no idea what is actually taught in English schools and it would be interesting to know.

Japan_Observer · 20 Dec 2006

I'll repeat what I said yesterday: the question of whether patriotism is good and appropriate or not is irrelevant.

The education reform bill and the preceding debate were a wasted opportunity, because instead of discussing how to improve how Japanese children are educated in light of a rapidly changing world, the discussion got bogged down in refighting past battles about nationalism.

It will be interesting to see how successful the government is at having its goals for the education system implemented. The divide between policy formulation and policy implementation is fairly basic in political science, in all areas. Those responsible for implementing policy -- i.e., local authorities and teachers -- may have agendas of their own and will have no problem finding ways to get what they want despite the Diet's passage of the legislation.

craftsman · 20 Dec 2006

Japan_Observer said:
The education reform bill and the preceding debate were a wasted opportunity, because instead of discussing how to improve how Japanese children are educated in light of a rapidly changing world, the discussion got bogged down in refighting past battles about nationalism.

You make the presumption that it is in the interests of the Japanese establishment to change the education system in light of a 'rapidly changing world'. Such a change was never on the cards nor is it desired.

You mentioned before when talking about industrial economies that "the goal (of education) has been to produce workers who can be plugged into a large organization and contribute in a relatively static, hierarchical setting" and also that "that won't do anymore." I see the goal as, however, to produce consumers who can be plugged into a corporate economy without the inclination or power to change the profitable status quo. And as long as there is a supremely powerful corporate lobby in Japan which in many respects is indistinguishable from the people and parties in power, on what basis would it be changed? Surely your words are more idealistic than practical.

So it was hardly a wasted opportunity if no real opportunity, only a facade, existed in the first place.

Japan_Observer · 20 Dec 2006

craftsman said:
Such a change was never on the cards nor is it desired.

You're right; it wasn't in the cards. That's the problem. And who doesn't desire it? You? The Japanese public? The government? You'll have to be more specific here.

craftsman said:
I see the goal as, however, to produce consumers who can be plugged into a corporate economy without the inclination or power to change the profitable status quo. And as long as there is a supremely powerful corporate lobby in Japan which in many respects is indistinguishable from the people and parties in power, on what basis would it be changed?

What's the basis of your argument? Is this the current goal of the education system? If so, why is every expert on the Japanese economy worried about slack consumer spending undermining Japan's economic recovery.

Winds of change are blowing through Japanese society. It may take time before their impact on the landscape is realized, but they are blowing, and they will leave Japan changed. The question is how, and what the political system can do to direct the change in a more favorable direction.

You need to move past the Karel van Wolferen view of Japanese society. Yes, there are powerful corporations in Japan, and yes, elements of the LDP are in cahoots with them. But the 1990s was a transformative time for Japan, and ruling elites have a harder time making self-interested decisions and getting away ill governance. The people are watching; there is real opposition in government.

So yes, I may be somewhat idealistic, but you may well be overly cynical. Change -- domestic change, international change -- is happening. The world is being reordered, and the question that each nation must answer is whether it will be flattened by change or whether it will ride the waves, so to speak. A country's ability to master change will depend on how it educates its children for the new order, and Abe's education reform will not contribute to that goal, and may even hinder it.

There are plenty of people -- in all parties, many in the rising generation in Japanese politics -- who appreciate how Japan needs to change. They saw the old 1955 system fail and collapse in the early 1990s, and they believe that Japan can do better. So don't be so quick to insist that Japan will never change.

Mars Man · 19 Jan 2007

Sorry...just wanted to keep these two up front and side by side. (as it may become a topic again soon enough.)

Trying to provide good education, and as practical, honest and fair an education as possible, while attempting to do so through a fortifying of bureaucratic designs, may well be self-defeating in the long run.

Japan to teach patriotism to children

先輩

先輩

先輩

先輩

Gimlet Eye

先輩

後輩

Gimlet Eye

後輩

Horizon Rider

後輩

先輩

いかんわ！

先輩

Horizon Rider

The Hairy Wookie

後輩

先輩

先輩

後輩

後輩

Gimlet Eye

************

Gimlet Eye

先輩

Similar threads