Japan is one of the advanced countries in East Asia and once occupied a prominent position among the world's great powers. In the nearly 100 years from the late Qing Dynasty to the end of World War II, Japan invaded the mainland, resulting in the loss of a large number of people's lives, and created many distressing events in an attempt to destroy our country and make us their slaves.
Looking back at the diplomatic history and cultural studies between China and Japan, we can see that Japan's feelings towards China are very complex.
As early as the Tang Dynasty, Japan sent troops to try to invade the mainland, but was resolutely repelled by our side. After that, Japan began to look squarely at this Eastern empire and used it as an example, sending envoys to the Tang Dynasty to learn from it. By the time of the Yuan Dynasty, the Mongol army had tried to attack Japan by sea, but was unsuccessful due to unfamiliarity with the sea conditions.
During the Ming Dynasty, the Japanese invaders frequently wantonly caused chaos in the southeast coastal area, committing adultery, plundering, murder and arson in Zhejiang, Fujian and other places. However, under the sweep of Qi Jiguang's strong troops and horses and the strength he had accumulated for many years, the arrogant behavior of the Japanese bandits was effectively stopped.
Therefore, it can be said that in the past, Japan had an attitude of reverence and learning from the mainland, and at the same time, it also harbored illusions of replacing it. The First Sino-Japanese Naval Battle caused the Qing Dynasty to suffer a rout, completely freeing Japan from the last trace of fear of China. With this came Japan's ambition to carve up or even monopolize China. Deeply influenced by Chinese culture, Japan pays attention to the principle of making a name for itself.
In order to realize the idea of national unity, the literati and people of Japan underwent a great change in their thinking, fabricating and disseminating deceptive theories in order to achieve the goal of unity between the whole and the people.
Despite the academic controversy between scholars such as Honan Naito and Kuyoshi Shiratori, there is a general consensus in domestic academic circles that there is a discordant relationship between them. However, in fact, the two are only different in philosophy, but they maintain a good relationship in life. More importantly, although they chose different paths, they all ultimately provided theoretical support for the Japanese invasion of China and endorsed their actions.
As a result, various pseudo-studies began to emerge in Japan, and Naito Hunan ostensibly showed his love for Chinese culture, but in his remarks, he argued that "China as a national entity has objectively ceased to exist, that is, it has perished, and therefore Japan's infiltration is the trend of the times and should be taken for granted."
In contrast, the Oriental School, represented by Shiratori Kuji, openly expressed its dislike for China. They put forward various theories in an attempt to prove the inferiority of Chinese culture and the Chinese people, and constantly incited Japanese national sentiment and a sense of national superiority.
These scholars have whitewashed Japan's aggression against China as a great feat of replacing the backward with the advanced, saving the backward, and realizing the common prosperity of Greater East Asia, and they do not hesitate to distort history to provide a basis for it.
Through his study of the Xinhai Revolution, Kita Kazuki provided strategic and strategic support for Japan's invasion of China.
The famous Japanese philosopher Nishida Kitaro advocated that China could be assimilated, regarded the two countries as mirrors, and advocated that the two could be "unified", but only if Japan was the leader, Japan was the first priority, and China was regarded as a "laggard" and could only obey.
In addition, Nishida also held that all patriotic and salvation, anti-imperialist, anti-feudal, national liberation, and anti-aggression movements were turning back the clock of history and doing everything possible to slander and slander. Japanese academics also vigorously promoted social Darwinism, arguing that China should be occupied by Japan and that Japan should transform this country, which was considered backward and annoying.
However, these so-called scholarly achievements only provide false theories of Taoism for erroneous behavior. Although it is of little value, it is still worthy of in-depth research in order to gain insight into the changes in the perception of Chinese in modern times, represented by Japanese scholars, and to understand Japanese national character and national psychology.
In terms of cultural and racial inferiority, ancient Japan tried to invade China many times but failed repeatedly, which made them have a certain degree of fear and respect for China.
However, even though the process of the modern powers knocking on the doors of the eastern countries with strong ships and cannons lasted only more than 100 years, it did not lead to an instantaneous change in the Japanese view of China, but went through a certain process and gradual changes.
As early as the end of the Japanese shogunate period, some Japanese thinkers such as Hondo Takeaki and Yoshida Shoin began to think about how to invade China and realize Japan's ambition to become a world power. Although there was no mature fallacy at that time, the vicious idea of China's ancient civilization had taken root in their hearts, and curses about China's future and destiny began to become popular in Japan.
At the same time, a large number of militarist theorists have actively written books and theories in an attempt to provide theoretical support for these derogatory remarks.
For example, Yamazaki Baiji's "This is Shina: A Scientific Analysis of the National Character of China" and Toranoryo Kato's "Chinese National Character and Economic Spirit" and many other works have tried to prove his views on smearing China through these works. They claim that although both Japan and China were relatively backward behind the West before modern times, the reason for Japan's rise was that Japan and China were ethnically different.
The aforementioned Naito Hunan, who claims to love Chinese culture, compares China to an earthworm, believing that even if it is cut into several pieces, it can still survive.
This is not to praise the tenacity of the Chinese, but to accuse the Chinese of showing indifference to the plight of the country at a time of critical survival, and that the Chinese government is also somewhat suspected of "not caring about itself, hanging high", lacking unity among themselves, and turning a blind eye to the death of their compatriots.
As Lu Xun wrote in "Mr. Fujino", the Chinese people were keen to watch the beheading of their compatriots.
These so-called academic studies, which are in fact the mouthpieces of Japanese imperialism, are full of hidden and sinister intentions, and they are full of loopholes. Both China's fate and the numbness of the Chinese stem from the forced restraint of ideas by the Qing rulers, and the responsibility is not for the people.
In the film "Seven Samurai", the famous Japanese director Akira Kurosawa shows the samurai's accusations against the peasants through a scene. He acknowledges the cunning, selfishness, and slickness of the peasants through the dialogue of the characters, but emphasizes that all this is caused by the samurai. In the same way, the Chinese may seem insensitive in recent history, but who is responsible for this? It was the rotten feudal rulers, the inhumane imperialist powers who tried to invade and carve up China.
However, Japanese scholars have turned a blind eye to this choice, not because they are not knowledgeable or intellectual, but because of ill-intentioned motives. On the surface, they analyze the national nature of the Chinese and the historical destiny of China, but in fact they are carrying out political and aggressive tasks, just like "Xiang Zhuang dances the sword, intended to be Peigong."
Behind all this, the image of the Japanese samurai is exploited, and everything is in the service of politics and aggression. The pseudo-science created by these militarist scholars to attack China and the Chinese people is not because the Chinese people provoked them, but to glorify the Japanese imperialist aggression against China.
The loss of moral support will lead to condemnation from the international community and may even shake support within Japan. Therefore, if you go outside, you must first settle inside. These attacks and smears against Japan are not aimed at the Chinese people, but are aimed at brainwashing at home and stirring up hatred and contempt for China.
He beautified his unjust war as a just war for the advanced to save the backward, described China's demise as the establishment of the Greater East Asia Co-Prosperity Sphere, and declared in the international community that everything was aimed at helping the Chinese people get rid of their difficulties and suffering, and even reforming their so-called inferior nature.
Hunan Naito, who also boasted of his love for Chinese culture, wrote two books, "On the Treatise on China" and "On the New Theory". He claimed that the purpose of these writings was to think for the Chinese, showing a feeling of "patron" and "saviorianism" that seemed to be rich in the unique Chinese. In the article, Naito repeatedly denied that he had a political purpose and emphasized that it was purely a cultural academic study.
In the Treatise on China, Naito argues that China's military is only interested in enriching itself and for banditry-like pleasures, and that he argues that China will not need to retain its defense for the next 20 years, especially since it will not be able to withstand the aggression of the Japanese and Russian powers even if it is rebuilt. Therefore, he argues that military spending should be cut to support finances now.
In addition, Naito Hunan denied the existence of China's sovereignty, claiming that the current "Shina" had long since perished, and that it was only a remnant of ruins.
As for Japan's economic plundering and war massacre against China, Naito Hunan instead regarded it as a kind of "mission" for Japan to China and the whole of East Asia. He believes that this kind of tough tactics is aimed at injecting new blood into the Chinese nation and convincing the Chinese, the Japanese, and the global public that Japan's war against China is a crude but last resort treatment.
Hunan Naito, who also professes to love Chinese culture, has written two books, "On the Treatise on China" and "On the New Theory". He claimed that the purpose of these writings was to think for the Chinese, showing a feeling of "patron" and "saviorianism" that seemed to be rich in the unique Chinese. However, at the same time, he interprets the inclusiveness of Chinese culture as exclusivity, while advocating the "cosmopolitan" nature of Chinese culture.
This so-called cosmopolitanism, which differs from Marx's "internationalism," is merely aimed at constructing the "theory of Asian cultural unity" and the "theory of the movement of cultural centers," which further strengthens Japan's sense of superiority and nationalism.
Compared with Naito Hunan, the Oriental School founded by Shiratori Kuji expressed more direct contempt and negative views on the Chinese and China's destiny. His study of Chinese history led to the core idea of the "Yao Shunyu Erasure Theory", which questioned the authenticity of ancient Asian legends, aimed at deconstructing ancient Chinese history, undermining the self-confidence of the Chinese nation, and vigorously criticizing Chinese civilization, and even distorting the idea of the Five Elements into China from Assyria.
Under the impetus of scholars of the Oriental School, such as Shiratori Kukichi, modern Japanese scholars strongly advocated the de-"Chinaization" of Japanese culture, interpreting Chinese culture and morality as the result of the winner being king, and arguing that barbarians were also qualified to be kings, thus belittling the nobility of Chinese civilization.
Shiratori Kuji also made an argument about the written beliefs and political system of the Chinese people, explaining them as inconvenient and backward, and treating the hundred schools of thought as a low-level philosophy.
What is even more outrageous is that Shiratori Kuji, as a supporter of the "empirical historical school" in the West, advocates that historical research requires a large number of documents. Therefore, he went to China many times to obtain a large number of precious historical documents and academic materials, and even stole many valuable cultural relics from the mainland by means of war, causing huge losses to the mainland's later historical and cultural research.
Although they try to claim that this is free academic research, this deceptive practice of buying and selling. Modern Japanese scholars such as Kita Kazuki were also critical of the Xinhai Revolution, not because they sided with the Qing Dynasty, but because Japan was a modern capitalist power that retained the emperor. They do not want to see that there really is an enlightened emperor in China who leads China to prosperity and strength, nor do they want to see the collapse of China's feudal dynasty and move towards a republic.
A successful Xinhai Revolution might free China from the control of the Great Powers, which was not necessarily a good thing for Japan at home. They feared that there might be a trend of imitation that would lead to the overthrow of the emperor system and the loss of the war of aggression they had waged in their claim of allegiance to the emperor. Those with vested interests under the emperor system may also face losses or be thrown into the dustbin of history.
The above-mentioned pseudo-studies and fallacies are only the tip of the iceberg, and there are many other examples, such as the "cultural pluralism" that glorifies Chinese culture on the surface, but actually reveals "cultural pluralism" that belittles Chinese culture. If these examples are cited and analyzed in detail, it is enough to write a book devoted to the matter.
In general, modern Japanese scholars have praised China, but they have been far more deprecating than praising it. This demeaning attitude is aimed at interpreting Japan's crimes as a historically justified act within the world and the Japanese people, and its intentions are painful.
The great man once said that the Japanese people and the Chinese people have a common enemy, that is, Japanese imperialism and militarism. Every Chinese should never forget the hatred of Japan.
However, it should also be noted that the fanaticism of the Japanese people for aggression in modern times was to a certain extent caused by the reactionary propaganda of the Japanese authorities, especially the ideas propagated by modern Japanese scholars as saviors.
To this day, Japan has not completely abandoned its unrealistic illusions of dismembering China and replacing it. The influence of the writings of those Japanese scholars on Japan is still being dissipated today.
Even at home, some self-professed independent thinkers and mavericks are convinced of these unrealistic ideas, and the influence of cultural soft power in aggression still exists. We must not only be vigilant against Japan's attempts to regain its reactionary arms, but also guard against the threat posed by these fallacies.