A Brighter Sunrise: more reforms in post-war Japan | WWII apologies, work culture, civil rights, no stagnant economy, digital tech

[Pipcard]

[Revised 2022-04-17. Formerly titled "A Longer Night, a Brighter Sunrise"]

Here are some ideas for a proposed timeline that addresses the most commonly criticized aspects of Japanese society, making it more reconciled with its neighbors and a more attractive place to live in (it doesn't have to be perfect, though).
(For discussion about a Japan that avoids Nazi-like militarism in the first place, see this thread)

It starts with Nationalist China winning the civil war, or at least having a larger presence on a divided mainland with a Communist Manchuria (I don't know exactly how, maybe the Imperial Japanese Army isn't able to weaken the KMT as much? Mao dies in the 1930s?). There would still be a Korean War that stimulates Japan's economic recovery, but the south would win, resulting in a united capitalist Republic of Korea. With less communist presence in mainland East Asia, there would be less Red Scare-induced backing by the US government of pre-war Japanese nationalists (part of the "Reverse Course"). In OTL, Nobusuke Kishi was nicknamed "America's Favorite War Criminal" and became prime minister in the late 1950s, and General MacArthur pardoned members of Unit 731 in exchange for their "research" (read: torture) data, but note that you can't entirely blame the US for more recent statements of denialism from the Japanese government. Here, non-communist China and Korea would be in a stronger position to pressure Japanese politicians to make unequivocal apologies for WWII. A "de-imperialization" process would occur, similar to denazification in Germany.

In OTL,

Germany confronted its wartime past so it could reassert German leadership in Europe at a time when a unified Cold War stand against the Soviet Union encouraged reconciliation.
On the other hand, Japan, at the urging of the United States, was positioned in a long-term Cold War confrontation with its principal victim in World War II, China. As a result, little motivation existed for Japan to look deeply at its atrocities against China, [Daniel] Sneider said.

But ITTL, instead of the Cold War discouraging reconcilation in Asia, the common threat of the Soviet Union and North China/Manchuria would give the US an incentive to help set up multilateral diplomatic relationships instead of the "hub-and-spokes" model, and give China, Korea, and Japan more motivation to settle grievances. There would be a larger reckoning and reflection in Japanese society about the atrocities committed by its government and military, such as the Nanking Massacre and the "comfort women" (sexual slavery) system. One of the prime ministers might make gestures similar to Kniefall, more efforts would be made to teach about Japan's crimes in schools, historical negationism and the rising sun flag would be banned, and war criminals would never be enshrined at Yasukuni Shrine by nationalist priests. With less backing from the CIA, there would be less dominance of the conservative Liberal Democratic Party for several decades, leaving room for more left-leaning workplace reforms (like reducing overwork and worker mistreatment), as well as more potentially successful protests or campaigns for gender and racial equality, or justice system reform. With more women's rights, they would not have to choose between having a career or having children, diminishing the phenomenon of a shrinking, aging population. Reforming overwork would also remove a major barrier in attracting foreign talent.

Regarding economic aid [in a KMT China timeline], it would be still coming, as getting Japan on its feet economically would be still important. After-all, Germany did also get massive amounts of aid too.

edit: The below paragraphs used to say that Japan wouldn't have an economic miracle in the 1950s, but would rapidly 'leapfrog' in the 21st century. However, @Erodian pointed out that a lot of social reforms only happen after a country's economy becomes prosperous.

Japan would still have a post-war economic miracle and be considered a developed country by the 1970s, but it wouldn't be as prominent or overwhelmingly successful due to the US also giving aid to China and Korea, and extra competition coming from their industries decades earlier. However, this competition would result in more incentives for innovation. With the right conditions over a longer period of time, it could develop an electronics industry that was more digital than analog, and famous for smartphones instead of cassette players. And/or have a major presence in the software/internet/AI industry. The issues of US-Japan trade friction in the 1970s and 1980s and the Plaza Accord (appreciating yen making exports too expensive) would be less significant due to Japan not being as reliant on exports to the US, but also trading with reconciled neighbors (like Germany, which also signed the Accord), mitigating the bubble economy and possibly averting Japan's Lost Decades.

You can also argue that the Biggest Japanese companies did TOO well. Around the 80s and 90s they didn't adapt to, or fund the invention of, new technology nearly as much as they could have or should have - because of complacency caused by their massive success building up to that time.

With less complacency/resting on laurels/vested interests/inertia/innovator's dilemma in business and government policy, and without the economic crash, Japan would be able to invest more in the digital/software age and become the Silicon Valley of Asia (like Shenzhen in OTL China) with "Bit Valley" in Shibuya, Tokyo. This would be somewhat later than the US due to kanji issues with early computers, but the use of hanzi hasn't stopped China in OTL from developing a major IT industry.

It would never overtake the US or China economically, but be in a solid third place with a GDP of $7 trillion instead of $5 trillion in the early 2020s, and its businesses and industries would have reformed to be more competitive and nimble in the 21st century. Some ups and downs, but no unsustainable bubble followed by 30+ years of stagnation. The rise of Japanese pop culture would also co-exist with Korean and Chinese pop culture. And like Germany in Europe, Japan would have more genuine soft power and a better reputation in Asia with less resentment, as there were more sincere apologies. Of course, Japan's space program would be somewhat more advanced, and maybe even have a crewed spacecraft. Without the expectations of the bubble, it would be a pragmatic capsule design like Fuji instead of a mini-Space Shuttle like HOPE.

...in the case of Japan, in particular, the fact that this state wouldn't be at the frontlines of the Cold War ITTL, as the main focus would be in China, would lead to a more thorough demilitarisation... There would also be a more thorough reorganisation of the Japanese economy, as there wouldn't be as much pressure as IOTL to prioritise the quick recovery of the latter... in general, economic recovery would be rather slower than OTL. However, the existence of China as a large market with great demands could compensate for these disadvantages, as there would be adequate demand to stimulate production in Japan in order to sell these products in China; if the Americans developed a coordinated plan to use the vast market in China to facilitate Korean and Japanese recovery and reconstruction through trade between these countries and supported it by offering funds, the resulting sustained increase in exports would benefit Japan.

Also, the need to compete with China could lead Japan and Korea to shift more quickly than OTL to new industries such as electronics and also, to enable the creation of larger business entities unofficially backed by the state and seek new markets.
...increased competition with China would prompt them to focus more an combination of very high quality and affordability for their products, as well as reforms in their corporate culture (more freedom for engineers, promotion by merit and not only by seniority etc) in order to enhance productivity and spur further innovation.

2023-04-19 - A map of the East Asian Community (description)

For more information and context:
"The Resistance to Change Is Rooted in Postwar Success" (1999)

Japan’s reluctance to make meaningful change is rooted in its success.
While Western nations have weathered economic ups and downs that forced them to restructure repeatedly, Japan’s steady growth and protected markets allowed it to preserve a 40-year-old system largely intact--a system that today almost qualifies as a fossil.
Thus Japan must alter not only its economy, but its four-decade-old ruling party, its deeply entrenched bureaucracy, labor unions, educational system, corporate community, even its family structure and social rules.
“Japan will hold on until it has no choice,” says Nobuhiro Hiwatari, professor of political science at Tokyo University. “Everything affects another thing. It’s really difficult to change one part of it now and leave the rest.”

"The Japanese Software Industry: What Went Wrong and What Can We Learn from it?" (2014) (I also mentioned it here)

Japanese leaders, with their strong success in manufacturing hardware, found it much more difficult to envision software as a full partner, much less alternative model. It is also a plausible hypothesis that the weakness of American manufacturing globally, relative to Japanese firms, gave American firms stronger incentives to search, sense, monitor, and respond to the new opportunities created by software. (pg 17)

u/AsiaExpert on r/AskHistorians:

[The lack of education in Japan about imperial war crimes] happened entirely because of Cold War adversarial politics.
With much of Asia seemingly falling to Communist forces, there was very little political value put in reconciliation. China was militant and aggressively pursuing a doctrine of violent Communist revolution in the region. Korea was war torn and half of it was controlled by an adversarial regime. South East Asia had swarms of Communist militias if not out right revolutions.
Japanese politicians simply didn't care. More importance was put in inspiring patriotism and convincing the people of the Communist threat while extolling the superior virtues of the capitalist system. Education was more about preparing the citizens for ideological warfare than critical thinking.
Speaking about the politicians that created this educational policy, many of these politicians were solidly right-wing and supportive of honoring if not glorifying the venerable statesmen and military leaders of Imperial Japan. Many of them had actually been purged by the American occupation but were reconciled and reintegrated because their staunch anti-Communist views made them desirable for American interests in the region.
Unfortunately, these politicians are the origins of political historical revisionism and academic repression. For example, in 1957 under the authorization system that was first installed during the US occupation, 8 middle school textbooks were banned. The contents of the books were fairly graphic and very anti-war, detailing the many atrocities and war crimes Japan had committed in the war.
They were labeled and politically dangerous and harboring Communist sentiments, and subsequently banned.

To get the Japanese economy to grow quickly in the 21st century, you need to solve of a series of social problems that (IOTL) do not seem to be going away anytime soon, including the declining birthrates, the sexism that is keeping women out of the workforce, the unwillingness to take in immigrants, static corporate culture and abysmal enforcement of worker's rights (which leads to a ridiculously overworked and unproductive workforce).
Perhaps the best way to get this would be to manufacture a lot of corruption scandals in the late 70s and early 80s (there were actually quite a few IOTL, we probably just need a little bit more) so that the LDP might become discredited in a way that allows the socialist party to come into power. Under a JSP government, the monetary and financial sectors would remain tightly regulated, organized labour and worker's rights would get a major boost, allowing the most exploitative aspects of Japanese work culture to be addressed, the keiretsus may get broken up and there's a possibility of social liberalization. The only problem is that such a massive shake up of Japanese society may lead to a lot of instability, which would obviously hurt the economy. But if the changes get done and endure, it will robably be worth it in the long run.

 

[Mitridates the Great]

As a suggestion, I think I would put less emphasis on "protests" and more on the government and pressure groups campaigning for these measures. Strong unions would be a better alternative.

It is true that in the United States organizing mass protests generally ends in the government either agreeing to the demands of the protesters, or ending up repressing them so brutally that it is overthrown by popular outrage ... and the new government ends up acceding to the demands of the protesters as well.

The problem is that in Japan, in general, organizing protests, unless it is for a specific and perfectly visible motivation, such as a nuclear accident, usually ends in society believing that the protesters are a group of crazy people who ask for the Luna, people who are good to reject because they want to sow chaos just because.

On the other hand, having stronger unions could help, especially if it seems that all they want is to improve working conditions and are not going for radical proposals such as starting the communist revolution by brute force (a relatively common accusation, and usually false , against unions in the Cold War).

I am skeptical that the anti-Japan reactions would disappear, remember, that depends on the very powerful racism and ultra-nationalism of the Americans. The best way would probably be for them to go on to hate another Asian country more (ROC maybe?) But I doubt that's the goal.

Suggestions on education reform combined with unions should help. Although I'm not sure if there is any place where Japanese Kniefall can be made, but there is probably somewhere that works for that.

I will comment on the rest when I have any suggestions.

 

[Changundramon]

A far later POD that would help at least a bit is Prime Minister Masayoshi Ohira not dying before thr 1980 election. His death galvanized LDP, and prevented a likely Socialist win. A Socialist government would push for civil rights and environmental regulations, but would also dismantle Japan's army. U.S. loses an ally.

The work culture itself would still be considered extreme, whatever party ruled Japan.

 

[Mitridates the Great]

A far later POD that would help at least a bit is Prime Minister Masayoshi Ohira not dying before thr 1980 election. His death galvanized LDP, and prevented a likely Socialist win. A Socialist government would push for civil rights and environmental regulations, but would also dismantle Japan's army. U.S. loses an ally.

The work culture itself would still be considered extreme, whatever party ruled Japan.

I think I would bet better on a reduction than on a dismantlement.

I mean, if the first thing a socialist government does when it seizes power is to dismantle the JSDF and demand that the United States leave, that would provoke a backlash from Americans and Japanese conservatives. Mainly because it would validate the thesis that the socialist parties are actually Trojan horses that are willing to disarm their nations to leave them defenseless against the attacks of the Eastern Bloc. Remember, it is the time of the Cold War, in which it was still believed that the USSR was yearning to launch into the conquest of Europe and Asia and the only reason they did not do so was because the United States was always alert and vigilant to contain them.

And certainly the United States would not sit idly by seeing that its main ally in Asia is apparently willing to commit suicide ... vastly weakening the entire US military deployment in the Pacific in the process.

 

[Changundramon]

I think I would bet better on a reduction than on a dismantlement. I mean, if the first thing a socialist government does when it seizes power is to dismantle the JSDF and demand that the United States leave, that would provoke a backlash from Americans and Japanese conservatives. Mainly because it would validate the thesis that the socialist parties are actually Trojan horses that are willing to disarm their nations to leave them defenseless against the attacks of the Eastern Bloc. Remember, it is the time of the Cold War, in which it was still believed that the USSR was yearning to launch into the conquest of Europe and Asia and the only reason they did not do so was because the United States was always alert and vigilant to contain them. .

An American-led backlash could lead to Communists and Socialists setting their differences aside. Soviets would have a field day if Americans disregarded results of fair elections. Hypocritical, yes. But it could even split the Japanese nationalists.

 

[Phalamus]

A far later POD that would help at least a bit is Prime Minister Masayoshi Ohira not dying before thr 1980 election. His death galvanized LDP, and prevented a likely Socialist win. A Socialist government would push for civil rights and environmental regulations, but would also dismantle Japan's army. U.S. loses an ally.

They were moderating those stances at the time. I believe Asukata had already said that he would not unilateral abrograte the security treaty if he elected Prime minister, not sure about the JSDF, but my gut tell me that pragmatism might very well win the day...

That said, I don't believe that just by Ohira not dying the socialists stand a realistic chance in 1980. The system was super rigged in favour of the LDP, so much that even if they lost more seats (they were already in a minority), they would likely remain the largest party and any alternative government would necessitate a really broad coalition of anti-LDP forces that I'm not sure is possible...

 

[Pipcard]

A far later POD that would help at least a bit is Prime Minister Masayoshi Ohira not dying before thr 1980 election. His death galvanized LDP, and prevented a likely Socialist win. A Socialist government would push for civil rights and environmental regulations, but would also dismantle Japan's army. U.S. loses an ally.

The work culture itself would still be considered extreme, whatever party ruled Japan.

Well, I guess that's why you need an earlier or different PoD.

 

[Pipcard]

People have usually wondered, "what if Japan's 1980s bubble had never burst in the 1990s?" The usual response is that "it would have burst even harder later on" because that is the definition of a bubble.

One of the goals here is to make it so that Japan's economic growth in the first few decades after the war isn't too rapid, so the bubble economy and subsequent collapse are prevented, but not so weakened such that it never becomes relevant by the 21st century.

(TheMann) People here have hit most of the important points. Ideally, the best solution is to never have the bubble grow in the first place, and as people have pointed out here, Japanese manufacturers are helped by MITI (or hindered, as the case may be) and Japan's domestic market was, and still is to an extent, heavily regulated in favor of domestic manufacturers.

Beating the bubble and joining the US and South Korea in the technology lead in the 1990s would make the country fly as the US' technology fields did in the 1990s. Toss in their expertise in robotics and electronics industries, and you could conceivably begin moving away from humans in industrial jobs as much as the population begins to fall.

 

[Changundramon]

One of the goals here is to make it so that Japan's economic growth in the first few decades after the war isn't too rapid, so the bubble economy and subsequent collapse are prevented, but not so weakened such that it never becomes relevant by the 21st century.

Socialist economics. Or at least, something like Scandinavian capitalism. If digital tech is a desired focus, perhaps the Japanese socialist/ Communist government takes up interest in things like Cybersyn, where Chile did not.

 

[Mitridates the Great]

People have usually wondered, "what if Japan's 1980s bubble had never burst in the 1990s?" The usual response is that "it would have burst even harder later on" because that is the definition of a bubble.

One of the goals here is to make it so that Japan's economic growth in the first few decades after the war isn't too rapid, so the bubble economy and subsequent collapse are prevented, but not so weakened such that it never becomes relevant by the 21st century.

Probably a good idea would be to better regulate the financial system, for example because the rulers have learned the lessons of Black Thursday, and do not want to expose themselves to the same thing happening again. Especially remembering that that crisis was what drove Japan to imperialist madness, something else that is supposed to be avoided ...

I thought Cybersyn was like Atlantrope or the colonization of Antarctica: the kind of silly idea that alternate history writers keep trying to put in because they think it's cool but without bothering to look at how something like this is supposed to be implemented successfully.

 

[Pipcard]

Instead of the Rising Sun Flag, this is the naval ensign (featuring the "seigaiha" wave pattern) that would be used by the Japan Maritime Self-Defense Force:

 

[Arthur Marston]

A far later POD that would help at least a bit is Prime Minister Masayoshi Ohira not dying before thr 1980 election. His death galvanized LDP, and prevented a likely Socialist win. A Socialist government would push for civil rights and environmental regulations, but would also dismantle Japan's army. U.S. loses an ally.

Yeah, there's no way the US is gonna tolerate that. At best, the PM would suffer an "unfortunate accident". At worst you'd get Pinochet 2: Japanese Boogaloo.

 

[Libertad]

Removing all of these so-called flaws of modern Japan that will make look like more of a Western European or North American nation-state in terms of social indicators require not only Japan-based changes but global trends changing that then Japan will copy or emulate. I may actually say that OTL Japan is the best Japan that we could get in terms of how it reaches second only to the United States in terms of economic strength, much of this is as a result of the fluke that is the rise of Maoism and this temporary historical stage of decline that Chinese civilization went through in congruence with the rise of the West.

Japan is a clean slate by 1945 and the average Japanese of the time wouldn't care much of the abolition of the monarchy and it may probably pass if it went through a referendum, even with SCAP interventions in favor of a "no" vote. The intervention may actually backfire and the "yes" vote get a majority. A Republic of Japan may then give itself a cleaner break from the old society and with it, a more honest historical assessment of its imperial past, especially if the conservative right-wing as a result of this got divided into the more monarchist versions that the more pragmatic conservatives will distance themselves from, allowing the political Left a greater space to function and flourish. And of course this is contingent to an international situation where the Cold War may get delayed in starting and also a more liberal SCAP administration that will not hinder the development of militant trade unionism and growth of a social democratic native government.

If China still went Maoist by 1949 and India continued on its non-alignment and License Raj and there is going to be Korean War, then we might see a Japan that will still go through its economic miracle and a better civil rights record, though I may argue that things will just be marginally better for the Korean/Chinese minorities and Japanese women and that Japan may still be quite resistant to immigration. If neoliberalism is still going to be a thing, then all you can do is damage control and a Japan that will still suffer from its effects but may have become more open to the rise of big tech ala Swedish/Baltic tech companies.

 

[Pipcard]

complacency/resting on laurels/vested interests/inertia/innovator's dilemma

"The Japanese Software Industry: What Went Wrong and What Can We Learn from it?" (2014) (I also mentioned it here)

Japanese leaders, with their strong success in manufacturing hardware, found it much more difficult to envision software as a full partner, much less alternative model. It is also a plausible hypothesis that the weakness of American manufacturing globally, relative to Japanese firms, gave American firms stronger incentives to search, sense, monitor, and respond to the new opportunities created by software. (pg 17)

This phenomenon is also called the "law of the handicap of a head start."

 

[Pipcard]

LeX came to the same conclusions described in the first post, and this might be a potential divergence point for more reconciliation between East Asian countries.

Meanwhile, in Asia things unfold differently. Mao Zedong dies a martyr on the Long March, and command of the CCP is turned over to someone like Zhou Enlai. In any case, they continue the march all the way to East Turkestan and Mongolia, and are marginalized as a force capable of uniting China. After the war, the USSR invades Manchuria in similar fashion as before, except due to butterflies it takes longer for the Kantogun to be defeated. The entirety of Korea is surrendered along with the rest of Japan to the USA.

In the postwar scene, a People's Republic of China (commonly referred to as just "Manchuria") is set up with its capital at Beijing, while the rest of China is Nationalist. East Turkestan and Tibet are never conquered, and the former is a Soviet puppet similar in status to Mongolia. The Manchuria-based Communist Korean resistance tries to take back their country from the American puppet government, but the campaign is in vain and only makes the USA paranoid of Communist expansion in East Asia.

The instability of the ROC in particular is worrying. Similar to Europe, the Americans think that it would be best if the "free countries" get along amiably, so when reforming Japanese politics and law they give explicit attention to reparations, apology, and complete recognition of war crimes.

If there was a good political reason for them to do so they would've. Germany didn't fess up for no reason. A lot of the Japanese war crime denial comes from the fact that the PRC was a hostile state and still sort of is. It's also important to note that Germans care a lot more about the 6 million murdered Jews than the 20 million dead Russians, who were also their responsibility. I've met Germans who believe that the Wehrmacht wasn't actually that bad in Russia and it was mostly just the SS going around finding Jews and commissars to kill.

If there was a Nationalist China set up in the postwar world to become a Japanese ally against Communism, the chances that the Japanese education system will force everyone to learn about Nanjing and Unit 731 are much, much higher.

 

[Mitridates the Great]

LeX came to the same conclusions described in the first post, and this might be a potential divergence point for more reconciliation between East Asian countries.

The only thing I can't quite see is where the idea that East Turkestan is independent and "avoids being conquered" by China comes from. Sounds like yet another case of "projection into the past" of "let's try to save the Uighurs today by establishing a forced divergence to separate the territory from China".

But yes, that would help in general. Someone in another of these threads described the relationship between Japan and China as "due to geopolitics, the aggressor and the victim were forced to continue at odds."

Saving the distances, it is possible that in this way the relationship was more similar to France and Germany, with the Koreans being Belgium.

 

[Pipcard]

Someone in another of these threads described the relationship between Japan and China as "due to geopolitics, the aggressor and the victim were forced to continue at odds."

Saving the distances, it is possible that in this way the relationship was more similar to France and Germany, with the Koreans being Belgium.

However, while "Cold War geopolitics" can explain (not justify, obviously) the lack of full apologies from the Japanese government to communist China, it does not really explain the same lack of reconciliation between the governments of Japan and non-communist South Korea, especially over the "comfort women" (sex slave) issue. You'll see Japanese nationalists who mistakenly believe "criticisms of Imperial Japan are racist attempts to make Japanese people look bad" (however, some people do use Japanese war crimes as an excuse to be racist towards Japanese people, and that's not okay, either).

There is also the Liancourt Rocks dispute, but that is mostly due to the ambiguity of post-war treaties.

 

[New Cleo Genesis]

Well, I guess that's why you need an earlier or different PoD.

One I could suggest is Ichirō Kōno actually going through with his threat of leaving the LDP with his followers in 1960, which would probably be the end of the 1955 System and keep Japanese electoral policies at least somewhat competitive.

 

[Workable Goblin]

Yeah, there's no way the US is gonna tolerate that. At best, the PM would suffer an "unfortunate accident". At worst you'd get Pinochet 2: Japanese Boogaloo.

It would not, but neither of those things would happen, nor would they need to happen. As previously pointed out, the LDP was very strong due to rigged election laws, so a JSP/JCP-led government would inevitably be a coalition of different parties in a narrow majority. All the United States actually needs to do is to put pressure on the government not to do either of those things; there will very likely be enough moderate members who aren't really on board with completely abolishing the military or withdrawing from the treaty that the PM just won't be able to get any such measures through, beyond maybe some symbolic victories. At worst you're talking about bribery, not military coups...

 

[Mitridates the Great]

It would not, but neither of those things would happen, nor would they need to happen. As previously pointed out, the LDP was very strong due to rigged election laws, so a JSP/JCP-led government would inevitably be a coalition of different parties in a narrow majority. All the United States actually needs to do is to put pressure on the government not to do either of those things; there will very likely be enough moderate members who aren't really on board with completely abolishing the military or withdrawing from the treaty that the PM just won't be able to get any such measures through, beyond maybe some symbolic victories. At worst you're talking about bribery, not military coups...

Let's also not forget that, given the Empire of Japan's coup tradition, promoting a coup in Japan in 1970 would surely make all the neighbors hysterically shout bloody murder and "here we go again, Empire of Japan 2.0."

Which I doubt the US would be interested in, since by rebound they would come to be perceived in Asia as promoting "the revival of the Empire" (even if the Japanese military government makes no attempt to attack its neighbors).