| Tweet |
【元防衛官僚・太田述正さんのコラム】日本学専門家が「日本では属米売国奴がナショナリストを自称」と指摘
下記は大田氏のメルマガ最新号からの抜粋であるが、
そこに次のような指摘があった、
------------------------------------------------------------
米国の電子雑誌Japan Focusのコーディネーターのマコーマック（Gavan
McCormack）は、日本では「日本は米国に従属し続けなければならないと執拗に言
い張る人々が自分達をナショナリストと呼んでいる」と皮肉を言ってますよ（
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Japan/JF26Dh01.html
。６月26日アクセス）。
------------------------------------------------------------
このマコーマックの記事の原文を、参考のために末尾に貼っておく。
日本の自称「ナショナリスト」の「改憲」勢力は、米国にこびへつらう
売国奴勢力であったという事情を勘案すると、彼の“皮肉”が
日本の現実を抉っていることがわかる。
------------------------------------------------------------
【改憲派は売国奴の工作隊であることが露呈！】護憲派「9条守ろう」、改憲派「国際支援へ改正を」＝憲法記念日、都内で集会
http://www.asyura2.com/07/kenpo2/msg/268.html
------------------------------------------------------------
▼▼▼▼▼▼▼▼▼▼▼▼▼▼▼▼▼▼▼▼▼▼▼▼▼▼▼▼▼▼▼▼▼▼
太田述正コラム#2634（2008.6.27）
＜皆さんとディスカッション（続ｘ177）＞
━[太田述正 有料メルマガご案内]━─━─━─━─━─━─━─━─━─━
2008年７月〜12月の有料講読を会費5,000円で募集中です、
↓
https://ssl.formman.com/form/pc/NBimYHYptaiymqXE/
からお申し込みください。
（なお、このフォームで一口5,000円のカンパも募っています。）
申し込みをされた方には、ただちに全コラムの配信を開始しますので、早く
申し込まれれば、その分だけおトクになります。また、会費を納入された段階
で、その時点までのバックナンバー（主要投稿付き）を贈呈します。
━─━─━─━─━─━─━─━─━─━─━─━─━─━─━─━─━─━
＜スワン＞
コラム#2632で、フランスとチベットが話題になっていたのに目を惹かれまし
た。
田吾作さん、私も「ル・モンド・ディプロマティーク」、読んでます。
私は「戦後ヨーロッパにおける「悪の問題」」が面白かったです。
私も、ホロコーストは事あるごとにクローズアップされるのに、他国独裁政権
の虐殺の歴史や、現在進行中のジェノサイドがあまり話題にならないことに、疑
問を持つことがあります。
ところで、６月21日読売新聞朝刊で、堤清二氏の回顧録の連載を読みました。
その中に、
「僕（堤氏）は、ナショナリズムを国粋主義、排外思想と同一視するのは、伝
統尊重を保守反動と同じと見る考えと共に、いわゆる進歩主義の大きな誤りだと
思っている。」
という一文があって、その通りだと共感しました。
その上で、石橋湛山を評価する記述がありました。私は石橋湛山のことはよく
知らないのですが、知ったら心酔しそうな気がします。太田さんは個人的に思う
ところはありますか？
コラム#2594で、太田さんは堤氏と面識があると読みましたが、実際に話をされ
て、共感する部分、しない部分があったと思います。
差し支えない範囲で、そのときのお話をお聞かせ頂けませんか？
＜太田＞
１ ナショナリズムについて
米国の電子雑誌Japan Focusのコーディネーターのマコーマック（Gavan
McCormack）は、日本では「日本は米国に従属し続けなければならないと執拗に言
い張る人々が自分達をナショナリストと呼んでいる」と皮肉を言ってますよ（
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Japan/JF26Dh01.html
。６月26日アクセス）。
確かにそうだとすれば、「ナショナリズム」と「国粋主義、排外思想」とは縁
もゆかりもないことになるけれど、まさか堤氏が日本のナショナリズムについて
このような皮肉たっぷりの捉え方をしているとは思われません。
そもそもナショナリズムとは何か？
例えば、スタンフォード大学哲学百科事典は、
・・・there is a fair amount of agreement about what is historically the
most typical, paradigmatic form of nationalism. It is the one which
features the supremacy of the nation's claims over other claims to
individual allegiance and which features full sovereignty as the
persistent aim of its political program. The state as political unit is
seen by nationalists as centrally ‘belonging’ to one ethno-cultural
group and as charged with protecting and promulgating its traditions.
This form is exemplified by the classical, “revivalist” nationalism,
that was most prominent in the 19th century in Europe and Latin America.
This classical nationalism later spread across the world and in present
days still marks many contemporary nationalisms.・・・（
http://www.science.uva.nl/~seop/entries/nationalism/
。６月27日アクセス）
と記しています。
つまり、最も典型的なナショナリズムは19世紀の欧州生まれであり、それが世
界に広がったということです。
この先は私見ですが、私はナショナリズムは、フランス革命の後、フランスで
生まれ、それが全欧州、ひいては（アングロサクソン以外の）全世界に広がった
、欧州文明が生み出したところの、民主主義的独裁の第一類型である、と考えて
いるのです（過去コラムは多数あり）。
ですから、やや露骨に言えば、「ナショナリズム」と「国粋主義、排外思想」
はイコールなのであり、堤氏の主張は「大きな誤り」です。
２ 石橋湛山について
私は、戦前日本型経済体制構築推進者の一人となり（拙著『防衛庁再生宣言』
234頁）、満州国でその原型の実験を行った岸信介、そして、戦後旧安保条約を新
安保条約に改訂することによって、日本を米国の傀儡国家から属国へと「昇格」
させた岸信介を高く評価しており、「加工貿易立国論を唱えて満州の放棄を主張
」した石橋湛山、そして、「日米安保条約改定に・・・批判的な態度をと」った
石橋湛山は全く評価していません。（「」内は
http://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E7%9F%B3%E6%A9%8B%E6%B9%9B%E5%B1%B1
（６月27日アクセス）による。）
３ 堤清二氏について
堤清二（辻井喬）氏にお目にかかった時の話は、申し訳ないけど控えたいと思
います。
今度の大阪でのオフ会の時にでもちょっとだけ小声でご披露しましょう。
＜大阪の川にゃ＞
1、７月４日に開催されるオフ会において、太田さんの講演が行なわれるのですね
。ほとんどドリンク代だけで生で聴ける人がうらやましいです。
自治体や省庁が行なっている「男女なんちゃらのための講演会」で、ジェンダ
ーが売りの女性タレントが2時間しゃべって50万円ももらっている中、頭が下がり
ます（典拠：雑誌「正論」2005年12月号）。
2、せっかくですから、太田さんの講演の模様を録画して、YOU-TUBEで公開して欲
しいものです。今までのテレビ番組では、どうしても細切れで分かりにくい箇所
が多々ありますから。
それに、TV局が自民叩きとして重宝している天下り論を、より強くTV関係者に
もアピールできるかもしれません。もっとも、属国論まして核武装論（典拠：コ
ラム1340・1712）は内容の過激さゆえに、東京のTV局には引かれてしまうでしょ
うね。
＜太田＞
実は、オフ会の時の「講演」をアップする予定です。
ただし、午前中、神戸でやった講演の要約版なので、イラク・ミャンマー・チ
ベット情勢の話になると思います。
▲▲▲▲▲▲▲▲▲▲▲▲▲▲▲▲▲▲▲▲▲▲▲▲▲▲▲▲▲▲▲▲▲▲
●下記はマコーマックの記事
▼▼▼▼▼▼▼▼▼▼▼▼▼▼▼▼▼▼▼▼▼▼▼▼▼▼▼▼▼▼▼▼▼▼
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Japan/JF26Dh01.html
Japan Jun 26, 2008
Japan, through the US looking glass
By Gavan McCormack
Japanese politics are characterized by two related paradoxes: first, that the word "conservative" is usually applied to those who insist on the need to remake Japan's postwar society, including its constitution, and who in other words are actually radicals. Meanwhile, those who insist on "conserving" Japan's postwar democratic institutions are labeled radicals or leftists; and second, that those who most insist that Japan subordinate itself to the United States describe themselves as "nationalists," while those who seek to prioritize Japanese over United States' interests are suspected of being somehow "un-Japanese". It all makes for confusion of the Alice in Wonderland variety.
The thrust of the "reforms" undertaken by the Junichiro Koizumi and Shinzo Abe governments between 2001 and 2007 was to bring Japan closer in line with the US in both security and economic terms. On the former, in 2003 Japan's armed forces were for the first time sent to a theatre of conflict at US behest and "conservatives" since then have attached the highest priority
to trying to ensure that in the future Japan could do more by joining the US in collective security actions (read: wars) as an East Asian Great Britain.
On the latter, the same "conservatives" have been intent on "liberalizing" the Japanese economy by the removal of remaining obstacles to the penetration of US and international capital. Currently, Japanese politics are in a state of frozen immobility, the Fukuda government having lost control over the Upper House but too fearful of annihilation at the polls to seek a mandate. Though immobilized, however, Fukuda faces the same direction as his predecessors.
The fact that the US - the model for Japanese so-called conservatives on both strategic and economic fronts - is engaged on a catastrophic and illegal war that has virtually destroyed one major country and destabilized an entire region, and that the excesses of its unregulated capitalism have plunged the world economy into the greatest crisis in a generation, should give pause to the proponents of such an agenda; but it seems not to.
The ink had scarcely dried on the 1946 constitution, incorporating the three principles of pacifism, human rights, and political democracy, before the US regretted it. Ever since then, it has been urging Japan to revise it. The brunt of US attention is directed to Article 9, the so-called pacifist clause.
For half a century, Japanese "conservatives", intent on remaking the country to American design, sought to revise (or neutralize) Article 9, but constitutionalist forces were simply too strong, both in the Diet and in the country at large. They had to be content with steadily watering it down by widening and loosening the way it was interpreted. Now, however, that is no longer enough.
As Japan wavered in 2007 over whether to renew its naval mission to the Indian Ocean, withdrawing and then resending its fleet, and as the reorganization of US military bases in Japan (agreed in 2005-2006), and Japan's conversion of its armed forces from what former defense secretary Donald Rumsfeld contemptuously called a "boy scout" corps to a real fighting army, both proceed far too slowly for the Bush administration, and American impatience mounted.
Only with explicit revision can Japan's Self-Defense Forces (SDF) become a regular national army (kokugun) able to fight alongside their American allies. Prime minister Abe in May 2007 succeeded in railroading through the Diet a law spelling out procedures for such a revision. In doing so, however, he so alienated the voting public that he and his government were resoundingly defeated at the Upper House election two months later. He had to resign shortly afterwards. In another "Wonderland" kind of paradox, Japanese revisionists, denouncing the existing constitution as an American imposition but insisting above all on American priorities for revision, actually replicated the events of six decades ago.
They now have a two-pronged strategy to meet American demands. In the short term, they hope to secure passage of a permanent law to authorize the overseas dispatch of Japanese Self-Defense Forces for "international cooperation activities". That would obviate the current need for a "Special Measures Law" (with attendant Diet debate and inevitable restrictions and conditions) every time the SDF is to be sent on a mission.
For the longer term, 239 present and former members of the national parliament joined on May 1 in a new organization - the Diet Members Alliance to Establish a New Constitution. Unlike its predecessors, this association incorporates prominent members of the opposition Democratic Party of Japan. By thus incorporating the opposition, the revision requirement of a two-thirds parliamentary majority becomes feasible.
Outside the Diet, however, to the dismay of revisionists the more they attack Article 9 the stronger public support for it becomes, reaching two-thirds in the May 2008 Asahi opinion survey. The Article 9 Society, established in 2004 by prominent intellectuals and public figures, has now grown to have 7,000 branches nationwide, rivaling as a grassroots political mobilization the anti-Vietnam war movement in the 1960s and 1970s. Where revisionists are ashamed by the constitution, the A9 Society members propagate it as a global model. In May 2008 they filled to overflowing a vast convention center just outside Tokyo under the slogan "The world has begun to choose Article 9".
As the "conservatives" revise their strategy for revision, they also display a disturbing contempt for constitutional principle. In April, when the Nagoya High Court found that the Koizumi and Abe governments had acted in breach of the constitution by consenting to US demands to "show the flag" and put Japanese "boots on the ground" in Iraq, and that therefore the Japanese troop presence in Iraq was both unconstitutional and illegal, the prime minister, chief cabinet secretary, minister of defense and the chief of staff of the Air Self Defense Forces all dismissed it, insisting that such a judgment would have no effect whatever on Japan's troop deployment. The rule of law and the separation of powers seemed to them irrelevant.
Nor is constitutionalism just about matters of war and peace. The LDP constitutional proposal would restore the Meiji Constitution's condition to human rights clauses "so long as this does not interfere with public order (chitsujo)". It would restore the emperor to the preamble, legitimize state involvement in Yasukuni rituals and subtly erode local self-government, even striking out Article 95.
Before any revision, already constitutional guarantees (in Article 25) of "minimum standards of wholesome and cultured living" and (in Article 21) of freedom of expression ring just as hollow for the irregularly employed, freeters (people who work temporary part-time jobs), pacifists and critics of society, as does Article 9's pledge that Japan will not possess "land, sea, or air forces". As neo-liberal "reform" spreads and deepens, further American-izing Japanese society, one in three Japanese workers is now exploited and impoverished as an "irregular", constituting a new class of working poor known as the "precariat", those living at the margins.
Shocking reports of the poor and the sick starving to death (one leaving a pathetic note saying how he longed for a rice ball ... ) or being reduced to homelessness or snatching sleep in all-night Internet cafes, are common. Relative poverty levels (within the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development) are worse only in the United States. As for freedom of expression, a recent court judgment affirmed the conviction (on trespass charges) of the "Tachikawa Three" for inserting leaflets opposing the dispatch of Japanese forces to Iraq into the letterboxes of defense force staff in 2003. For their "crime" of protesting a troop dispatch that the Nagoya court has now found to have been illegal and unconstitutional, they were arrested and held for 75 days in detention - as if they were criminals.
Article 9 (war) and Article 25 (livelihood) may also be closely related. Late in 2007, one desperate young freeter published an essay that encapsulated the social despair that currently spreads, especially among young people. For him, only the prospect of a war offered hope, since, he believed, only in a state of war could there be the sort of upheaval of society from which betterment might come.
------------------------------------------------------------
Gavan McCormack is a coordinator of Japan Focus. His Client State: Japan in the American Embrace, was published in New York and London in 2007, and its publication in Japanese, Korean and Chinese translation is imminent.
(Republished with permission from Japan Focus)
▲▲▲▲▲▲▲▲▲▲▲▲▲▲▲▲▲▲▲▲▲▲▲▲▲▲▲▲▲▲▲▲▲▲
投稿コメント全ログ コメント即時配信 スレ建て依頼 削除コメント確認方法
題名には必ず「阿修羅さんへ」と記述してください。
掲示板,ＭＬを含むこのサイトすべての
一切の引用、転載、リンクを許可いたします。確認メールは不要です。
引用元リンクを表示してください。