Organizer: Tomomi Yamaguchi, University of Chicago

Chair: Norma M. Field, University of Chicago

Discussants: Norma M. Field, University of Chicago; Franziska Seraphim, Boston College

Nationalism has become one of the key issues in international, national and local controversies in the socio-cultural politics of contemporary Japan-from debates on Japan's war responsibility, constitutional revision, and the content of history textbooks to gender equality and the social consequences of immigration. This interdisciplinary panel focuses on the contemporary nationalisms in Japan, and investigates how they are reproduced, negotiated, and challenged in different sites of struggle between the nationalist Right and those who oppose them. In order to effectively connect three case studies, the panel, composed of scholars from different disciplinary backgrounds, is employing the innovative format of three paper presentations introduced and concluded with commentaries by two discussants. The first discussant, Seraphim, will set the historical context to the three case studies from the perspective of memory politics. The three papers analyze specific contested terrains of nationalism in Japan, using the theoretical and methodological tools of sociology, architectural history and anthropology, respectively. Lim explores the transformation of ethnic and national identities through the struggles between right and left-wing sectors of resident Korean intellectuals. Takenaka examines nationalist attacks on peace museums resulting from competing historical interpretations of Japan's war responsibility. Yamaguchi presents an insider view of a current court case tied to backlash against feminism. Finally, by responding to the three papers, Field will deepen the discussion of nationalism and current socio-political struggles, and postulate the ways that scholarship can influence today's political situation in Japan and the world.

Youngmi Lim, City University of New York Graduate Center

The Korean community in Japan has been described as politically divided because of the homeland politics of a divided Korea. However, I will argue that the community's politics are increasingly tied to the backlash politics in contemporary Japan. This paper examines different expressions of Japanese societal membership definitions and the "loyalty" question vis-à-vis Japanese war responsibility among resident Korean intellectuals. Responding to different (Japanese) audiences, resident Korean intellectuals define Japanese societal membership in polarized ways. Some argue for a universal citizenship based on basic human rights, challenging the existing nationality-based Japanese civic participation. They demand that suffrage and the right to work and get promoted in the civil service be granted regardless of nationality. Others emphasize that a simpler procedure is needed for the acquisition of Japanese nationality. This is seen as a practical solution to the dissonance between a subjective feeling of belonging and the legal boundaries of citizenship, especially among resident Koreans in Japan. Each claim, whether that of Japanese societal membership beyond Japanese nationality, or that defined solely by Japanese nationality, is supported by a politically diverse Japanese majority. Although they share the label of "minority," the opinions expressed by resident Korean intellectuals are appropriated to serve different political causes of the Japanese mainstream. Comparing recent opinion pieces which were published in daily newspapers and journals during the past decade, I will analyze how selectively each medium portrays the voices of resident Korean intellectuals that are complementary to its overall political tone and how nationalist and alternative discourses are mutually dependent.

Akiko Takenaka, University of Michigan

Japan is home to over 200 museums that focus on the Asia-Pacific War. The interpretive stances of these museums vary considerably, reflecting the highly politicized nature of war remembrance just within a single country. From the so-called "Peace Museums" that address Japan's war crimes and aggressive behavior toward nationals of other Asian countries both inside and outside Japan, to the numerous Public Relations Facilities (koho shisetsu) owned and operated by the Self Defense Forces that unabashedly celebrate Japan's military history, these museums, some private and others funded by tax money, strive to promote their particular view of modern Japanese history as the mainstream. Many museums have changed exhibits, and others have permanently postponed construction, after having been targets of political attacks. Based, in part, on a series of interviews I conducted with the curators of several museums from different parts of the political spectrum, and a close observation of their displays, I examine and compare the ways through which these museums attempt to present their historical viewpoints, and how they justify their choices. In particular, I examine the series of political attacks on "Peace Museums" launched by the same conservative groups that utilized middle-school history textbooks to promote their view of modern Japanese history, and how the targeted museums have reacted to them.

Tomomi Yamaguchi, University of Chicago

Since the enactment of the Gender Equality Law in 1999, feminism has become the target of extensive "backlash" in Japan from various conservative forces, especially so-called "grassroots right-wingers," most notably Nippon Kaigi (Japan Conference). Varieties of policies and practices aimed at achieving gender equality, such as Article 24 of the Constitution, local Gender Equality Ordinances, gender-equal educational practices in public schools and even the notion of "gender" itself have come under attack. I will examine one of the local sites of such contestation over gender, sexuality and nationalism: an ongoing lawsuit against the city of Toyonaka, Osaka Prefecture, by a feminist activist and former director of the city's women's center. The plaintiff, Mitsui Mariko, was fired by the city in 2004, after having been the target of intense pressure by right-wing forces. Based on my extensive review of publications and court documents, as well as participant observation as one of the core members of the plaintiff's support group, I will examine the major actors in the case: 1) the local government, 2) right-wing politicians, "citizens" and religious organizations, and 3) feminists, and investigate the discourses on gender, sexuality and nationalism employed by these actors. The case will problematize the history of the close relationship between feminists and the government since the mid-1970s. I also intend to explore the issue of scholarly responsibility and the possibility of feminist anthropological endeavors in such a political climate.