Summary Of Japanese Isolationism

The policy known as 'isolationism' was made because the rulers thought their people wouldn't be self-sufficient and would want to focus on trade with foreigners, that outsiders wanted to change their traditional practices & beliefs and that European nations could eventually threaten their rule. For some time, the Chinese tried to become self-reliant, but they realized that when they did that, the country could not settle economically, especially when attempting to keep a communist vision when it came to economics. The culture of Japan came up with limited influence from the outside world and had one of the longest times of peace in history. During this time, Japan developed thriving cities and castle towns which started agriculture and domestic

This research essay will examine how the Isolation policy, introduced by the Tokugawa shogunate, was a turning point in Japanese history. The first section of the essay will discuss the rationale for the policy’s introduction. This will be followed by an analysis of the short and long term effects this policy had on Japanese Society.

From 1641 to 1853, the Tokugawa shogun of Japan enforced a policy called kaikin. The policy declined foreign contact with most outside countries creating an isolationistic Japan. The culture of Japan developed with very limited influence from the outside world and had one of the longest periods of peace in history. During this period, Japan developed thriving cities, increased agriculture, labor, and literacy rates. On July 8, 1853, American Commodore Matthew Perry led ships into the Tokyo Bay harbor, seeking to re-establish for the first time in over 200 years regular trade between Japan and the western world. The same combination of economic desires and belief in Manifest Destiny that motivated U.S. expansion across North America also drove

The Japanese had long held a policy of isolation. This history of Japan and its isolationist policy is wonderfully explored upon in Louis Perez’s work, The History of Japan. In this work, it is explained that the Japanese did not want any western influences in Japan. This cultural caution of the West and its technology had been something going on for centuries. It became most noticeable during the Tokugawa Era, during which time Japanese Christians were nearly eradicated in 1614 through 1640. During the time of the Tokugawa era, most nations were banned from visiting Japan except in designated ports for trade. Even fewer western nations were allowed to conduct business in Japan, and even then the government heavily monitored

Within the short time frame, a significant transformation in political, industrial, and societal means took hold, seeing Japan as a great power within the world. Emperor Meiji’s death in 1912 saw in end of an era at its own representation (Goto-Jones, 70). More change came as the Japanese social environment felt to be continually bewildered by the western powers. In response, this drove Japan to imperialize and eventually join World War II. After losing the war, Japan was subjected for significant change once again. With the 1947 Constitution it is the people who hold sovereignty, as opposed to The Emperor who did so in the Meiji Constitution (Goto-Jones, 96). A contribution and push to Japan's unique adoption of modernization after World War II can be attributed to pressings such as Article 9, which prohibits Japan from being able to declare war, and from possessing military power other than the minimum necessary to defend the nation. This, along with the Reverse Course. This helped Japan move more towards a modern democracy by having its foreign policy based around its relationship with the US, which set Japan as a beacon of US policy in Asia (Goto-Jones, 97).

Evaluate their significance in the context of Japan’s response to Western influence in East Asia and the subsequent rise of Japan as an Asian power.

In “The Coast at Takanawa in the Eastern Capital”, Hiroshige II captures a large crowd of

Because of Europe’s industrialization their relations with China, India, and Japan were all severely compromised. First, China had previously rejected all foreigners in order to protect their country from Western philosophy. However, Europe then invaded China in order to control their trade. This reinforced China’s hatred for foreigners and destroyed any trust China placed in Europe. Japan was very similar. Japan is a country of tradition and honor. They did not want to be influenced by Western thought, and previously rejected Europe. But just like China, Europe eventually invaded in order to control their trades. The end result was the same, Japan then despised the foreigners even more and all trust was destroyed. Last was India. India was a central point of the East Indies Trade, and because of that, England desired full control. In similar fashion to Japan and China, Britain overtook India in order to control their ports and goods. In the end, India lost all faith and trust in the English people and desired for their removal. All three countries, with the exact same story; industrialization destroyed relations with these countries all because the West desired more power.

Between 1932 and 1936, admirals ruled Japan. Within government, the idea of the ‘Greater East Asian Co-Prosperity Sphere’ emerged. This plan called for Asian unification against western imperialism under Japanese leadership, leading to Asian self-sufficiency and prosperity. In reality, it meant an agenda of Japanese imperial domination in the Far East because of the domestic coup in

Historians tend to portray the Meiji Restoration as one of the most rapid modernizations of the 19th century (1868-1912), leading Japan into becoming one of the top world powers of today. If not for the reforms lead about by the Meiji Restoration, Japan would not have been able to develop itself as a world power in the late 19th and early 20th century. This manuscript will criticize sociality, economics and military within Japan.

The Meiji relied on using the modern ways the western countries had taught the men the Meiji sent to learn and bring back to show the rest of their country. After getting a grip on the new ways of the western countries the Meiji had started to become good allies with Germany. The Meiji looked up to the leader of Germany Otto von Bismarck. Bismarck had begun embracing Nationalism and Japan/The Meiji had taken this and spread it throughout their country. As these changes were all being made to the country of Japan the citizens realized that with a strong leader more opportunities arose for the country and that having a strong emperor would help take away many problems farmers and peasants were having with a weak emperor in rule over the country.

Japanese imperialism was uniquely derived during the nineteenth century within the structure of the informal empires of the West in East Asia. Due to Japanese political feudally and economically backwards system, it was a victim to powerful Western Empires such as Russia, Britain and the United States. They had imposed similar legal and commercial disabilities previously in China to serve their imperialistic needs. Japan was officially integrated into the treaty port system by 1860, thus establishing it’s first step towards incorporation into the world economics. The international political environment was crucial in structure Japanese imperialism particularly in two ways. Firstly, treaty privileges in China became Japanese definition of success, hence structuring Japanese responses and international aspirations. Secondly, it raised awareness for an unavoidable setting for action. Historically, Japan would appease and seek satisfaction within the structure of western imperialism. Thereafter, Japanese imperialism reformed internally in response to the demanding international environment.

Japan’s history has been mostly accounted as a history of a homogeneous national entity in the post-war historiography. Yet as Andre Schmid and Jordan Sand contest, this notion is replete with problems. Not only does this interpretation gloss over the historical fact of Japan as an imperialist and colonialist power, but it also dismisses the dynamic embedded in history that shaped the trajectory of Japan from an empire to a nation-state as seen today. This paper will briefly discuss the question of Japan’s “national” history and argues for a reconsideration of Japan’s historical position within the history of empires by drawing this week’s readings.

Louise Young in her introduction to the AHR forum, “Japan’s New International History,” identifies two waves of scholarship on Japanese imperial history, from the 1960s emphasis on the state’s role to the emergent socio-cultural turn in the recent two decades. The extension of the new paradigm also blurs the national and cultural boundaries in mapping out Japan’s modern history in a global frame. Susan Burns’ article, “Constructing the National Body: Public Health and the Nation in Nineteenth-Century Japan,” which looks at the tension between the state and the popular over the regulation of the body in the early Meiji period, can be considered the new scholarship that concerns less about the institutional explanation but more about

had become a threat to the United States to the point that it had to