Plausibility Check: Earlier Democratization of Japan

After a series of exhaustive wars in Meiji Era which didn't go as successful as OTL, the Japanese start to loathe the new imperial government for their military adventurism, overt westernization, Satsuma-Chōshū oligarchy, corruption, and broken promises on liberal democracy.

The death of Emperor Meiji (1912 IOTL, can be earlier ITTL) triggered a series of political transformations that rejected the authoritarian and militarist elements of the Meiji restoration, and resulted in a new constitution more focused on peace and liberal democracy, in line of Meiji Era Freedom and People's Rights Movement.

Think of the trends of Taishō democracy, but more institutionalised.

(What I really want to ask: was it possible for military defeat to lead to democratization? Or even worse militarism?)
 
Last edited:
A modified Meiji Constitution is a good start. Put some provisions that reduces the influence of the military, like removing the rights of the Army and Navy to appoint a minister on their own.

With the military marginalized, the liberal movement will definitely flourish.
 
A modified Meiji Constitution is a good start. Put some provisions that reduces the influence of the military, like removing the rights of the Army and Navy to appoint a minister on their own.

With the military marginalized, the liberal movement will definitely flourish.

Thank you.

But was it possible that military defeats would lead to democratization? Or even worse militarism?
 
Think of the trends of Taishō democracy, but more institutionalised.

(What I really want to ask: was it possible for military defeat to lead to democratization? Or even worse militarism?)

Yes, the Meiji constitution is a good start.

Isnt OTL a military defeat resulting to a change of governance in Japan?

Also, having an emperor in favor of democracy, will do a lot of good. It is very hard to contradict the emperor since the emperor is the center of all things in Japan.
 
Yes, the Meiji constitution is a good start.

Isnt OTL a military defeat resulting to a change of governance in Japan?

Also, having an emperor in favor of democracy, will do a lot of good. It is very hard to contradict the emperor since the emperor is the center of all things in Japan.

Defeat is a light word, it's a total military occupation that changed Japan. If someone tried to cut military budget after a defeat in a war, I can't see how he can find much support. The logical response would be to spend more to strengthen the military so as to not be defeated again, unless you are now ruled by the GHQ.
 
Defeat is a light word, it's a total military occupation that changed Japan. If someone tried to cut military budget after a defeat in a war, I can't see how he can find much support. The logical response would be to spend more to strengthen the military so as to not be defeated again, unless you are now ruled by the GHQ.
Indeed. The era of Meiji coincided with the the tailend of the Victorian Colonial era, which gave the fear that a sign of weakness would lead to the shore being swarmed by European and American concessions. They had the example of China to show for that.

Even more of a problem once Japan gains its own vulnerable colonies such as Korea and Taiwan that need to be defended.

The 19th century was kind of a rather bad time for most people.
 
Indeed. The era of Meiji coincided with the the tailend of the Victorian Colonial era, which gave the fear that a sign of weakness would lead to the shore being swarmed by European and American concessions. They had the example of China to show for that.

Even more of a problem once Japan gains its own vulnerable colonies such as Korea and Taiwan that need to be defended.

My ideal scenario for late 19th century and early 20th Century was:

A resurgent Japan and resurgent China at the same time, with China building up a stronger land power to keep the Russians in check (means early Qing territory, Russians locked in Siberia) , while Japan recognizes China's traditional role in continental Asia, and ceases to seek expansion into Korea and Taiwan (meaning a downsized Army). In exchange, China recognizes Japan's naval supremacy in the region, leaving most of the maritime Asia (with the exception of Taiwan) for Japan. This means future Japanese military buildup would be naval, and its expansions are largely in SE Asia and India.

TTL's equivalent of Nisshin/Jiawu War would be a war which re-oriented Japan as a democratized sea power, whereas TTL's Russo-Japanese War would be fought between China and Russia.
 
Indeed. The era of Meiji coincided with the the tailend of the Victorian Colonial era, which gave the fear that a sign of weakness would lead to the shore being swarmed by European and American concessions. They had the example of China to show for that.

Even more of a problem once Japan gains its own vulnerable colonies such as Korea and Taiwan that need to be defended.

The 19th century was kind of a rather bad time for most people.

That said, I believe Japan could have theorically dodged colonialism and it's later implications and consequences, like you pointed.
 
Top