著者
酒井 哲哉
出版者
JAPAN ASSOCIATION OF INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS
雑誌
国際政治 (ISSN:04542215)
巻号頁・発行日
vol.2014, no.175, pp.175_70-175_83, 2014

For most Japanese IR scholars, Nagai Yônosuke is known as the most representative realist in Post-War Japan. Given the hegemony of idealism in the discursive space in 1950's Japan, it is not an exaggeration to say that his appearance as a conservative realist in 1960's was a historical event. In the studies concerned with political science in Post-War Japan, however, Nagai is usually depicted as a pioneer in behaviorism inspired by contemporary American political science. This article intends to synthesize these two aspects which were hitherto separately discussed, and by doing so resituate his works in the intellectual history of Post-War Japan.<br>Chapter I examines Nagai's works before his debut as an international political scientist. Influenced by his brother, Nagai in his teens was concerned with the philosophical trend of logical positivism. During the Pacific War, however, fascinated by German romanticism, he went further to accept anti-Semitic theory on conspiracy. Given this experience, after the war, he began to be engaged in research on political consciousness with the theoretical framework of sociological psychology and had soon established himself as a promising political scientist. Nagai's behaviorism owed heavily to Maruyama Masao's work, <i>The World of Politics</i>, published in 1952. Based on Lasswell's works, Maruyama had there presented his behavioristic model of political power and suggested the importance of the activities of voluntary associations as a remedy for political apathy in mass society. In 1950's, Nagai as well as Maruyama regarded his behaviorism as a progressive venture to establish democracy in Post-War Japan. However, Nagai was not a blind advocate of behaviorism. Reviewing Weldon's work, <i>the Vocabulary of Politics</i>, which was founded in logical positivism, he criticized the scientific assumption of American behaviorism and its inclination to social engineering. Nagai did not even conceal himself from his sympathy with Hans J. Morgenthau's criticism to social engineering. Thus Nagai's ambivalent attitude toward American political science was a prologue to his subsequent conversion to conservative realism in 1960's.<br>Chapter II investigates Nagai's works on international politics in 1960's focusing on the relationship between his concern in 1950's. and 1960's His first article on international politics, "American concept of war and the challenge of Mao Zedong" founded its theoretical framework on his behavioristic political science including key concepts such as "situation", "institution" and "organization". His criticism to American concept of war was apparently based on his antipathy to social engineering which had already appeared in late 1950's. Nagai was misunderstood by his contemporaries as an epigone of American scientific strategic studies. Discussing Nagai's ambivalence toward scientific approach, this chapter explains the reason why such misunderstandings had occurred<br>Chapter III depicts how Nagai viewed the political turmoil in 1968. As an expert in the study of mass society, Nagai was sensitive to the impact of rapid economic development commencing in early 1960's upon contemporary Japanese politics. Nevertheless, he did not advocate the end of ideology. He rather appreciated the importance of utopian ideas in the post-industrial society. In his article "Why dose socialism exist in America?", Nagai criticized the stagnant institutionalized American liberalism and appreciated utopian idealists including Riesman and Fromm. Therefore, while adopting conservative realist critique in discussing American foreign policies, Nagai took sides with "utopian socialists" in reviewing American domestic politics. His dual strategy took its root in his consistent criticism to the institutionalized American liberalism.
著者
酒井 哲哉
出版者
JAPAN ASSOCIATION OF INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS
雑誌
国際政治 (ISSN:04542215)
巻号頁・発行日
vol.2014, no.175, pp.175_70-175_83, 2014

For most Japanese IR scholars, Nagai Yônosuke is known as the most representative realist in Post-War Japan. Given the hegemony of idealism in the discursive space in 1950's Japan, it is not an exaggeration to say that his appearance as a conservative realist in 1960's was a historical event. In the studies concerned with political science in Post-War Japan, however, Nagai is usually depicted as a pioneer in behaviorism inspired by contemporary American political science. This article intends to synthesize these two aspects which were hitherto separately discussed, and by doing so resituate his works in the intellectual history of Post-War Japan.<br>Chapter I examines Nagai's works before his debut as an international political scientist. Influenced by his brother, Nagai in his teens was concerned with the philosophical trend of logical positivism. During the Pacific War, however, fascinated by German romanticism, he went further to accept anti-Semitic theory on conspiracy. Given this experience, after the war, he began to be engaged in research on political consciousness with the theoretical framework of sociological psychology and had soon established himself as a promising political scientist. Nagai's behaviorism owed heavily to Maruyama Masao's work, <i>The World of Politics</i>, published in 1952. Based on Lasswell's works, Maruyama had there presented his behavioristic model of political power and suggested the importance of the activities of voluntary associations as a remedy for political apathy in mass society. In 1950's, Nagai as well as Maruyama regarded his behaviorism as a progressive venture to establish democracy in Post-War Japan. However, Nagai was not a blind advocate of behaviorism. Reviewing Weldon's work, <i>the Vocabulary of Politics</i>, which was founded in logical positivism, he criticized the scientific assumption of American behaviorism and its inclination to social engineering. Nagai did not even conceal himself from his sympathy with Hans J. Morgenthau's criticism to social engineering. Thus Nagai's ambivalent attitude toward American political science was a prologue to his subsequent conversion to conservative realism in 1960's.<br>Chapter II investigates Nagai's works on international politics in 1960's focusing on the relationship between his concern in 1950's. and 1960's His first article on international politics, "American concept of war and the challenge of Mao Zedong" founded its theoretical framework on his behavioristic political science including key concepts such as "situation", "institution" and "organization". His criticism to American concept of war was apparently based on his antipathy to social engineering which had already appeared in late 1950's. Nagai was misunderstood by his contemporaries as an epigone of American scientific strategic studies. Discussing Nagai's ambivalence toward scientific approach, this chapter explains the reason why such misunderstandings had occurred<br>Chapter III depicts how Nagai viewed the political turmoil in 1968. As an expert in the study of mass society, Nagai was sensitive to the impact of rapid economic development commencing in early 1960's upon contemporary Japanese politics. Nevertheless, he did not advocate the end of ideology. He rather appreciated the importance of utopian ideas in the post-industrial society. In his article "Why dose socialism exist in America?", Nagai criticized the stagnant institutionalized American liberalism and appreciated utopian idealists including Riesman and Fromm. Therefore, while adopting conservative realist critique in discussing American foreign policies, Nagai took sides with "utopian socialists" in reviewing American domestic politics. His dual strategy took its root in his consistent criticism to the institutionalized American liberalism.
著者
酒井 哲哉
出版者
一般財団法人 日本国際政治学会
雑誌
国際政治 (ISSN:04542215)
巻号頁・発行日
vol.2014, no.175, pp.175_70-175_83, 2014-03-30 (Released:2015-09-05)
参考文献数
40

For most Japanese IR scholars, Nagai Yônosuke is known as the most representative realist in Post-War Japan. Given the hegemony of idealism in the discursive space in 1950’s Japan, it is not an exaggeration to say that his appearance as a conservative realist in 1960’s was a historical event. In the studies concerned with political science in Post-War Japan, however, Nagai is usually depicted as a pioneer in behaviorism inspired by contemporary American political science. This article intends to synthesize these two aspects which were hitherto separately discussed, and by doing so resituate his works in the intellectual history of Post-War Japan. Chapter I examines Nagai’s works before his debut as an international political scientist. Influenced by his brother, Nagai in his teens was concerned with the philosophical trend of logical positivism. During the Pacific War, however, fascinated by German romanticism, he went further to accept anti-Semitic theory on conspiracy. Given this experience, after the war, he began to be engaged in research on political consciousness with the theoretical framework of sociological psychology and had soon established himself as a promising political scientist. Nagai’s behaviorism owed heavily to Maruyama Masao’s work, The World of Politics, published in 1952. Based on Lasswell’s works, Maruyama had there presented his behavioristic model of political power and suggested the importance of the activities of voluntary associations as a remedy for political apathy in mass society. In 1950’s, Nagai as well as Maruyama regarded his behaviorism as a progressive venture to establish democracy in Post-War Japan. However, Nagai was not a blind advocate of behaviorism. Reviewing Weldon’s work, the Vocabulary of Politics, which was founded in logical positivism, he criticized the scientific assumption of American behaviorism and its inclination to social engineering. Nagai did not even conceal himself from his sympathy with Hans J. Morgenthau’s criticism to social engineering. Thus Nagai’s ambivalent attitude toward American political science was a prologue to his subsequent conversion to conservative realism in 1960’s. Chapter II investigates Nagai’s works on international politics in 1960’s focusing on the relationship between his concern in 1950’s. and 1960’s His first article on international politics, “American concept of war and the challenge of Mao Zedong” founded its theoretical framework on his behavioristic political science including key concepts such as “situation”, “institution” and “organization”. His criticism to American concept of war was apparently based on his antipathy to social engineering which had already appeared in late 1950’s. Nagai was misunderstood by his contemporaries as an epigone of American scientific strategic studies. Discussing Nagai’s ambivalence toward scientific approach, this chapter explains the reason why such misunderstandings had occurred Chapter III depicts how Nagai viewed the political turmoil in 1968. As an expert in the study of mass society, Nagai was sensitive to the impact of rapid economic development commencing in early 1960’s upon contemporary Japanese politics. Nevertheless, he did not advocate the end of ideology. He rather appreciated the importance of utopian ideas in the post-industrial society. In his article “Why dose socialism exist in America?”, Nagai criticized the stagnant institutionalized American liberalism and appreciated utopian idealists including Riesman and Fromm. Therefore, while adopting conservative realist critique in discussing American foreign policies, Nagai took sides with “utopian socialists” in reviewing American domestic politics. His dual strategy took its root in his consistent criticism to the institutionalized American liberalism.
著者
酒井 哲哉
出版者
JAPAN ASSOCIATION OF INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS
雑誌
国際政治 (ISSN:04542215)
巻号頁・発行日
no.117, pp.121-139,L12, 1998

This essay intends to analyse the formative process of discourses on international politics in post-war Japan, and by doing so shed light on the hitherto neglected aspects of Japanese political thought. Most of previous studies have understood discourses on international politics in post-war Japan as a simple dichotomy, realism/idealism, and paid little attention to the intellectual contexts in which these discourses had their own roots; While "idealists" have searched for their identity in that Japan was reborn as a "peace-loving" nation after the end of the Pacific War, "realists" have acused the "idealists" of being naive. Both of them, however, seem to have overlooked or possibly masked from what kind of historical background discourses on international politics in post-war Japan had emerged and to what extent post-war discourses had been influenced by pre-war ones. Therefore, this essay will uncover the complicated relationship of political thought between post-war and pre-war Japan.<br>Chapter I "Morality, Power and Peace" treats how relationship between morality and power in international politics was argued during the early post-war era. Dogi-Kokka-Ron (Nation Based on Morality), the dominant discourse on peace immediately after Japan's surrender, insisted that Japan search for morality rather than power and by doing so exceed the principle of sovereignty, characterestic of modern states. In spite of its appearance, however, Dogi-Kokka-Ron contained echoes of philosophical argument of the Kyoto School which had advocated morality of Japan's wartime foreign policies vis-à-vis Western imperialism. Thus Maruyama Masao and other leading intellectuals, who belonged to the school known as Shimin-Shakai-Ha (Civil Society School), tried to differentiate their arguments from Dogi-Kokka-Ron and create another discourse on morality, power and peace. Since the Kyoto School had criticised harshly the modernity and nationalism during the Pacific War, Shimin-Shakai-Ha's undertakings resulted in reestimation of the modern nation-state. This chapter further elucidates Shimin-Shakai-Ha's ambivalent attitudes toward power and norm in international politics with special reference to its understandings of the concept of the equality of states.<br>Chapter II "Regionalism and Nationalism" focuses on Royama Masamichi's argument on regionalism. Regionalism was a difficult topic to handle during the early post-war era because it could bring to mind the idea of the Great East-Asia Co-Prosperity Sphere during the Pacific War. Royama, founder of the study on International Politics in Japan, was one of the rare figures who continued to advocate the significance of regionalism. This chapter surveys Royama's argument on regionalism from the mid-1920's to the mid-1950's and investigates how his concern about development and nationalism of Asian countries appeared within the framework of regionalism. Royama's argument is also suggestive for better understanding of the context in which the "Rostow-Reischauer line" surfaced in the early 1960's.<br>Chapter III "Collective Security and Neutralism" elucidates several aspects of this issue which have not been hitherto fully investigated. Whether positively or negatively, neutralism in post-war Japan has been understood as a typically "idealistic" attitude toward international politics. However, the context in which the concept of neutrality was understood and argued in the early post-war Japan was more complicated. Discourses on neutralism at that time had still echoes of the controversies over collective security during the inter-war years. The Yokota-Taoka Controversy which took place in the late-1940's witnessed the continuity of pre-war and post-war arguments on this issue. This chapter, therefore, focuses on the Yokota-Taoka Controversy and analyses its impact on the following arguments of
著者
酒井 哲哉
出版者
財団法人 日本国際政治学会
雑誌
国際政治 (ISSN:04542215)
巻号頁・発行日
vol.2004, no.139, pp.144-158,L15, 2004-11-29 (Released:2010-09-01)
参考文献数
63

In the midst of the Pacific War, SHINOBU Junpei, international lawyer and diplomatic historian, provided a bold speech at the general assembly of the Japan Association of International Law. Reflecting his experiences in studying and teaching international law of war for more than thirty years, Shinobu cautioned the audience about the rapid decline of obedience to international law after the Sino-Japanese War amongst Japanese. Although making the least reservation for fear of censorship during the wartime, Shinobu undeniably had presented his keen anxiety about the decreasing effectiveness of international law of war as restrainer to the total war. Did practices and norms of the classical diplomacy including international law of war remain relevant to international order during the interwar years? If they still had relevance, how could they be applied to Japanese diplomacy in the different situation from the pre-W. W. I era? This article intends to shed lights on the ambivalent attitude of Japanese intellectuals toward international order during the interwar years who had still believed in the classical diplomacy even after W. W. I with special reference to the case of Shinobu Junpei.In the historiography of Japanese studies of international politics, Shinobu is known for his pioneering works, “International Politics” published in the mid-1920's. Investigating those works, the first chapter analyzes how Shinobu perceived the trend of the “New Diplomacy.” While skeptical about the Wilsonian idealism, Shinobu regarded the “democratization of diplomacy” as the trend of “national diplomacy” which had increasingly gained currency in Japan after the Russo-Japanese War. In this sense, like H. Nicolson's classical work on diplomacy, Shinobu's works tried to tame the “New Diplomacy.”Given those perceptions, Shinobu had published a series of essays arguing how Japanese foreign policies were and should be. The second chapter therefore tries to delineate Shinobu's diagnosis of Japanese foreign policies around the Manchurian Incident and evaluate the significance and limits of his legalist approach toward the Manchurian problems with comparison to the cases of ROYAMA Masamichi and KAMIKAWA Hikomatsu, younger political scientists emerging after W. W. I.The third chapter surveys the trend of Japanese studies on international law of war after the Manchurian Incident. Shinobu's persistence in international law of war will be discussed here with comparison to the case of TAOKA Ryoichi who had shared the realist sentiments to international politics in the 1930's. Finally, on the basis of the post-W. W. II recollections, this article depicts how Shinobu viewed the Pacific War manly focusing on his understanding of the relationship between the Renunciation of War Treaty and the Pacific War.
著者
酒井 哲哉
出版者
北海道大学法学部
雑誌
北大法学論集 (ISSN:03855953)
巻号頁・発行日
vol.40, no.5-6, pp.1143-1190, 1990-09-17
著者
松浦 正孝 山室 信一 浜 由樹子 土屋 光芳 中島 岳志 高橋 正樹 宮城 大蔵 WOLFF David 大庭 三枝 吉澤 誠一郎 姜 東局 大賀 哲 酒井 哲哉 後藤 乾一 都丸 潤子 関根 政美 矢口 祐人 高原 明生 遠藤 乾 松本 佐保
出版者
立教大学
雑誌
基盤研究(A)
巻号頁・発行日
2008 (Released:2008-04-01)

本研究は、アジア各地における多様なアジア主義のビジョンと構造を解明し相互比較すると共に、アジア主義ネットワークの生成過程を解明した。方法としては、国内外から選ばれた各地域の専門研究者と各事例を議論することで、アジア主義に共通の構造と地域それぞれに固有の特徴とを明らかにした。そうすることで、各地域におけるアジア主義を相対化して民族中心的なバイアスから解放し、アジアにおける共同体の可能性と条件、各民族・国家の共生の可能性を探ろうとした。