Nishida Kitar{u014D}'s political philosophy : war-time Japan and the empire of governmentality
Creators: name: Kawamura, Satofumi
Publisher: name: The Australian National University
Year: 2012
Subjects: subject: B5244.N554 K39 2012
subject: Nishida, Kitar{u014D}, 1870-1945 Political and social views
subject: Political science PhilosophyJapan

description: The main concern of this dissertation is the ambivalence, or duality, of Nishida Kitaro's political (and cultural) philosophy. Nishida's political stance during the Asia Pacific War from the 1930s to 1940s has been highly controversial, because his former students argued the justice of the war waged by Japan in several symposiums, such as "Overcoming Modernity" (Kindai no ch{u014D}koku), and Nishida himself also wrote the essay "The Principle of the World New Order" (Sekai shin-chitsujo no genri) as a draft for the "Joint Declaration of the Greater East Asia Conference" (Dai-t{u014D}a ky{u014D}d{u014D} sengen) at the request of the Japanese Army. Hitherto, this controversy has been dominated by the dichotomy between defenders and critics, and the point at stake in it is whether Nishida was supportive or not of war-time politics and ideology. The project of this dissertation is to shed new light beyond this existing controversy. It is true that Nishida's politico-cultural philosophy can be understood as a counter discourse against the political trend promoted by the militarists and ideologues, because Nishida tried to advocate a universal and immanent principle in terms of which individual freedom must be respected. However, at the same time, Nishida's critique could not be a fundamental criticism against the ideology of the political trend, because his logic could vindicate the exercise of power which led to the reinforcement of the National Polity (Kokutai) and the Greater East Asia Co-prosperity Sphere (Dai-t{u014D}a ky{u014D}ei-ken), which were core concepts of the ideology. To evince this proposition, this dissertation refers to Michel Foucault's analysis of governmentality. This is because Foucauldian governmentality analysis can provide the angle from which the exercise of power underpinned by the universal immanent principle can be elucidated. In other words, Foucauldian govemmentality analysis makes it possible to understand how the principle to respect individual freedom can be the principle to regulate individual action. Through the enhancement of individual freedom, the universal principle immanent to society can form the subject who is directed to the reinforcement of government and dominance of a political regime. Therefore, by referring to Foucauldian govemmentality analysis, we can understood that Nishida's politico-cultural philosophy based on the immanent principle also can work as the principle to form the subject (shutai) directed to the National Polity and the Co{u00AD} prosperity Sphere. Finally, this dissertation will elucidate that Nishida's politico-cultural philosophy vindicated the Japanese Empire as a postimperial "Empire" in Michael Hardt and Antonio Negri's sense, which is underpinned by the principle which respects "freedom" "rationality" and "universality." In addition to research on Nishida's political philosophy, this dissertation looks at his disciples' war-time discourse: Odaka Tomoo, Miki Kiyoshi, and the participants of the symposium of "The World Historical Standpoint and Japan" (Sekai-shi-teki tachiba to nippon), such as K{u014D}saka Masaaki, Nishitani Keiji, K{u014D}yama Iwao, and Suzuki Shigetaka, who were the so-called Kyoto School (Kyoto-gakuha) philosophers. Through the examination of their discourse, this dissertation elucidates the similarity and difference between Nishida and them, and thereby locates their ideas in a wider context.