AHC: Japan becomes a democracy without WWII
- Thread starter CthulhuFhtagn
- Start date
They lose the Russo-Japanese War and/or suffer a heavy recession over it even after victory. The Japanese needs a collective memory of experiencing hypocrisy between reality and the ultranationalist rhetoric espoused by the government. Ultranationalism cut from the bud will definitely help in a growth of Japanese democracy, and possibly keeping the right-wing more moderate.
trurle
Banned
The effect would be exactly opposite. Remember how Showa Depression in Japan or Great Depression in Weimar Republic have brought ultra-nationalists to the power. When people have no paid work, they blame neighbouring countries, instead of their own
The early transition of Japan to "democracy" is Alien Space Bats issue, given the economic and trade climate of the early 20th century. In the best case, Japan may develop a fragile civil political system
The POD that could make this possible--in my opinion--comes from Japanese Prime Minister Hara Takashi not assassinated in 1921. Just him surviving the assassination attempt could have profound effects on the political future of the country.
I don't see any reason why not. History shows us many dictatorships in developed countries peacefully becoming democracies (in fact, I think all of them?) South Korea and Taiwan for something close to home, Spain and Portugal a little further afield.
A Japan that sits WWII out (or whatever) will probably still have pressure start to build from the bourgeoisie and the people to remove power from the hands of the military in the fact of increasing prosperity. This is especially true if the military isn't able to find a stream of convenient enemies (though I suspect something like a strong China would be an excellent such enemy, especially if Japan keeps Manchuria)
A Japan that sits WWII out (or whatever) will probably still have pressure start to build from the bourgeoisie and the people to remove power from the hands of the military in the fact of increasing prosperity. This is especially true if the military isn't able to find a stream of convenient enemies (though I suspect something like a strong China would be an excellent such enemy, especially if Japan keeps Manchuria)
I'd give Japanese democracy a bit more credit than that.The effect would be exactly opposite. Remember how Showa Depression in Japan or Great Depression in Weimar Republic have brought ultra-nationalists to the power. When people have no paid work, they blame neighbouring countries, instead of their own
The early transition of Japan to "democracy" is Alien Space Bats issue, given the economic and trade climate of the early 20th century. In the best case, Japan may develop a fragile civil political system
It ultimately doesn't matter if it goes all far-right crazy, it just needs to stop being expansionist. Failure at 1904 may just do the trick.I have no doubts that his survival would lead to a better form of Japanese democracy particularly in the 20s, but it would ultimately turn to the far-right in light of a global economic recession("failure of liberal democracy") and rise of fascism. Furthermore the fundamental problem is that Japan's military and economic successes buttress the ultranationalist rhetoric espoused by religion and government.
Examples given are very different in nature with the Empire of Japan. They were in different eras, for starters. Also unlike what many may think Korea in particularly has a very different political culture from Japan, arising from stronger influences of Confucianism and being a united polity centuries before Japan.
How will Japan "sit out" of WWII, though? It's not as simple as "they don't attack Pearl" as many people seem to believe. Furthermore a weak China may make it even easier for the military to argue they need to attack the mainland, especially if they already have Manchuria. I'll argue again that their defeat in 1904 may do the trick, but a better one would be losing at the First Sino-Japanese one.
I'd give Japanese democracy a bit more credit than that.
I have no doubts that his survival would lead to a better form of Japanese democracy particularly in the 20s, but it would ultimately turn to the far-right in light of a global economic recession("failure of liberal democracy") and rise of fascism. Furthermore the fundamental problem is that Japan's military and economic successes buttress the ultranationalist rhetoric espoused by religion and government.
Examples given are very different in nature with the Empire of Japan. They were in different eras, for starters. Also unlike what many may think Korea in particularly has a very different political culture from Japan, arising from stronger influences of Confucianism and being a united polity centuries before Japan.
How will Japan "sit out" of WWII, though? It's not as simple as "they don't attack Pearl" as many people seem to believe. Furthermore a weak China may make it even easier for the military to argue they need to attack the mainland, especially if they already have Manchuria. I'll argue again that their defeat in 1904 may do the trick, but a better one would be losing at the First Sino-Japanese one.
There is another solution, retain the Anglo alliance.
The British would have influence over the Japanese to the point that Japanese politics can be affected.
Without the British alliance the Japanese would have gone insane in 1915 right after the 21 demands.
However, I dont know how Russia will win vs Japan with the financial support of Britain and United States. The funds from France isnt as limitless as Britain+United States. Japan losing requires pod pre 1900.
Japan's usefulness kind died out quickly after 1905. Furthermore the 21 Demands shouldn't have happened in the first place, must've been the worst expansionist move ever in the 20th century. Made everyone freak out and didn't get half of what they originally opted for.
For Russia to win I'd think Port Arthur not capitulating so quickly may be one major part of the trick. Another would be no Dogger Bank.
You need to remove the Japanese military's air of invincibility. It is one factor that made them a major force in government affairs.
I think Japanese PM Hara Takashi was heading in that very direction at the time of his assassination in 1921. Some have speculated the assassin may have been stooge for Japanese militarists.
Czar Kaizer
Banned
How's about changing Japan's Prussian style constitutional structure by ensuring that the military is under the direct control of the cabinet instead of being virtually independent.
Red Horse
Really hard to do that without triggering revolts from the former samurai class. And there is also the belief that a strong military is a bulwark against foreign encroachment. They weren't entirely wrong about the latter.
But how does a longer-living Takashi convince the military to stop having successes in Siberia(at the time)? The military was ultimately invincible, no failures until deep in the Pacific War.