Twentieth Century Chronicle

Page 208

From this perspective, the troubles encountered by Yamamoto Gonnohyōe and Ito Sukeyuki when forming their cabinets were the same: their personal prestige was insufficient to shoulder the heavy responsibility of forming a cabinet, and they needed the support of the navy as an organization. Ito's solution was to ally with the new technocrats by promoting a group of technocrats who would have difficulty becoming ministers in the feudal aristocratic system, thereby winning the support of the new technocrat group.

Yamamoto Gonbei wasn't unwilling to use people from the Satsuma clique, but the bureaucrats of the Okubo faction and the military of the Saigo faction had split after the Satsuma Rebellion, to the point that Saigo Tsurumichi refused to accept the imperial order to form a cabinet. Besides being wary of Yamagata's plan to lure him away from the mountain, Saigo also distrusted the bureaucrats of the Okubo faction.

Therefore, as Saigo Tsugumichi's successor, Yamamoto Gonnohyōe, while wanting to restore the Satsuma clique's status, dared not accept traditional Satsuma bureaucrats. He could only use younger, more capable officials with little connection to past grievances. However, because the Satsuma clique had long been unable to obtain the power to form a cabinet, these younger officials had virtually no political influence.

For example, Makino Nobuaki, most people have no idea that his biological father is Okubo. So although Makino is highly respected in the upper echelons, he has almost no influence at the government level. The only influence he can maintain is the influence left by Okubo in the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. However, due to the obstruction of other forces, Makino has no chance to take over the position of Minister of Foreign Affairs.

Yamanouchi's reputation was limited to the Satsuma clique; outside of Satsuma, no one knew him. Therefore, the young and powerful forces of Satsuma, led by Makino, were doing well enough to stabilize the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. Helping Yamamoto Gonnohyōe stabilize the entire cabinet was beyond their capabilities. Forcing it would only create a mess and make Yamamoto Gonnohyōe take the blame.

As a politician eager to make a difference, especially given the achievements of the Ito cabinet, Yamamoto Gonnohyōe had no choice but to compromise with Ito and Kawahara. After Ito first chose to ally with the new technology bureaucrats, this group naturally tended to use Ito as their political spokesperson. Until Yamamoto Gonnohyōe showed sincerity towards the new technology bureaucrats, he could not possibly treat them as his own people.

Thus, in this cabinet, the new technology bureaucrats finally began to grasp the power to dominate politics. In particular, Ogawa Heikichi and Hara Yoshimichi were themselves part of party politics. With their ministerial resumes in the Ito cabinet, they finally formed their own political circles in this cabinet.

As a result, Ogawa's housewarming party was almost a gathering of half of the Yamamoto cabinet members. Naturally, these newly appointed ministers took the opportunity to avoid the public eye and held a private discussion about the future of the Yamamoto cabinet.

The participants in this secret meeting were five ministers: Ogawa Heikichi, Hara Yoshimichi, Abe Isoo, Wakatsuki Reijiro, and Takahashi Korekiyo, plus Hayashi Nobuyoshi, who represented the navy. Although Hayashi Nobuyoshi's position made it hard to believe he could represent the navy, Ogawa Heikichi, Hara Yoshimichi, and Abe Isoo believed he could, Takahashi Korekiyo did not object, and Wakatsuki Reijiro had no choice but to acquiesce.

Although Takahashi Korekiyo was appointed minister because of his achievements in foreign loans during the war, he also had the support of Ito and Shibusawa. Wakatsuki Reijiro, on the other hand, was nominated entirely because of his outstanding work in the Ministry of Finance, and he had no real political backing.

However, although these five people have different political backgrounds, they are quite similar in their political beliefs, because they all gained their place in politics because of their expertise, so they naturally agree with the direction of governing the country by experts.

Previously, the disagreement between the Army and the government on the issue of military expansion had led to the possibility of the current cabinet being dissolved at any time. As a result, not much attention was paid to the political direction of the current cabinet. However, today, Lin Hsin-yi, representing the Navy, made a guarantee that the Army would soon seek a compromise with the government and that the current cabinet would not be forced to dissolve because of the Army's problems. This gave everyone the intention to sit down and discuss policies.

Although Yamamoto Gonnohyōe is nominally the organizer of the cabinet and the policy maker, there are already five ministers sitting here. If half of the cabinet reaches a consensus, then Yamamoto Gonnohyōe can only proceed according to everyone's decision. Therefore, this is naturally something that new ministers who want to make a difference in politics would welcome, which is the fundamental reason why everyone can sit together for a secret meeting.

However, this secret meeting was originally supposed to be a meeting where the five ministers would each express their political ideals and then seek a common political goal that could meet everyone's requirements. But because of Lin Xinyi's involvement, the meeting took a different turn.

Lin Hsin-yi was originally only supposed to represent the Navy at the secret meeting to witness the coordination among the five ministers, and then relay the results to the Navy's senior leadership, thus forming a coordination plan between the Navy and the government. However, Lin Hsin-yi preemptively announced the Navy's demands for the current government's governance before the five ministers could.

"The current government has been able to maintain its position because all parties have recognized the Asian cooperation plan based on East Asian peace. However, the purpose of Asian cooperation is not merely to maintain peaceful relations between Asian countries. Reaching understandings only in political and military matters is not enough to maintain peace between countries."

For Asian cooperation to become a solution supported by all countries, then the people of each country must feel that the Asian cooperation mechanism can bring them direct benefits. These direct benefits are primarily reflected in the economy.

Therefore, the core of the Asian cooperation mechanism does not lie in the signing of peace agreements or the demarcation of borders among countries, but in the establishment of an Asian trade and economic system. That is, countries can conduct trade through mutually recognized trade principles to improve their national economic development. Only then can the Asian cooperation mechanism truly gain the recognition of the people of all countries and will not be undermined by the political claims of a small group of people.

The Chiba Prefecture Heavy Industry Center Plan, China's Manchuria Development Plan, and India's Industrial Development Plan are actually complementary. We need India's high-grade iron ore and China's coal, while China and India also need Japan's experience as an industrial pioneer. Therefore, within the circle of the three Asian countries, cooperation between Japan, China, and India is mutually beneficial.

However, if this circle is not closed, we will also find that Japan's experience as an industrial pioneer is difficult to compare with that of advanced industrialized countries in Europe and America. In terms of industrial products, Japanese products are no match for those of Europe and America. Take cotton fabric, Japan's most mature industrial product, for example. While my country has achieved international competitiveness in the manufacture of low-grade cotton fabric and roving, it is not a cotton-producing country and still relies on imports for cotton textile machinery. This means that even in fair competition, my country will find it difficult to compete with cotton-producing and industrialized giants like the United States.

As for high-end cotton fabrics, this sector was entirely controlled by European countries, with Britain holding absolute dominance in their manufacture. Looking at other industrial sectors through the lens of the cotton textile industry, Japan appeared even more backward.

Therefore, I believe everyone can reach the same conclusion: Japan's industrial technology still has a long way to go to catch up with Europe. In order to improve the international competitiveness of Japanese industrial products, we need to find a stable and growing market for them so as to accumulate strength to catch up with the technological development level of advanced European countries.

The Army's continental policy was actually proposed to solve this problem. However, the outcome of this war taught us that there is only one Qing government in the world, and we cannot expect to encounter an opponent like the Qing every time, where defeating it would guarantee large sums of reparations and numerous privileges.

Why was the Qing Dynasty able to sign the Treaty of Shimonoseki with us, while the Russians didn't even want to pay a single ruble? Because the Romanov dynasty considered themselves Russian, while the Qing imperial family did not consider themselves Chinese. War reparations could strip the Romanov dynasty of its legitimacy in ruling Russia, but the Qing Dynasty's rule over China was inherently illegitimate. They were more worried about being expelled from China, which is why they shared some of the looting of the Chinese people with foreigners, whether it was Britain, Russia, or Japan.

Therefore, the Qing Dynasty was a rare phenomenon in the world. If our opponent in the Sino-Japanese War had not been the Qing, Japan would not have been able to obtain such a huge war gain as the Treaty of Shimonoseki. Today, the Japanese people regard the outcome of the Sino-Japanese War as the norm of war, precisely because of the Qing Dynasty. It can be said that the Qing Dynasty not only harmed China but also misled the Japanese people, making them believe that war is a profitable business rather than death itself.

Therefore, the army's continental policy essentially treated all its opponents as the Qing government. They believed that by continuously defeating their opponents, they could expand military spending through war reparations, thus achieving a strategy of sustaining war through war. However, the outcome of this war has proven that the army's strategy was utter nonsense. The Russians were not the Qing Dynasty, and even the Chinese have woken up, abandoning both the emperor and the Qing Dynasty.

Therefore, if Japan continues to tolerate its so-called continental policy, it will be mired in a quagmire of continental warfare. Not only will Japanese industry be unable to obtain markets and raw materials from the mainland, but Japan's young and able-bodied workforce and various social resources will ultimately be consumed by the army. The Chinese don't need to defeat us; as long as they persist in fighting us, Japan will be forced to use its precious foreign exchange reserves to import arms instead of machinery. National policy will then be hijacked by the army, and all the achievements since the Meiji Restoration will ultimately vanish.

Therefore, attempting to emulate the Western model of conquering East Asia through war and then establishing new Japanese colonies on the East Asian continent is an impossible and flawed path. The Navy believes that the current global colonial system has reached its limit. Not only are the nations enslaved and colonized by Europe finding this system unbearable, but even late-developing industrial nations like the United States and Germany cannot accept the current situation where the global market is divided among established powers like Britain and France.

Therefore, continuing to follow the colonial ideologies of Britain and France would not only fail to solve Japan's problems with overseas markets and raw material supplies for industrial development, but would also make it an object of hatred for the colonized countries and regions. These colonized countries and regions might be helpless against established powers like Britain and France, but they would inevitably prioritize attacking emerging powers like Japan, which were weak and lacked national strength, in order to solidify national independence consciousness and establish a social foundation for further liberation from the old colonial system.

Therefore, the Navy's assessment of the international situation is that Japan should stand on the side of the anti-colonial system, uniting with developing industrialized countries and colonized countries and regions around the world to counter the global colonial system, which is already showing signs of decline. Only when Japan establishes an alliance against the colonial system can we possibly leverage our shared political stance to build a small economic and trade circle among Japan, China, and India.

Under this shared political ideology, in order to destroy the oppression of their own people by the old colonial system, China and India chose Japanese industrial products, which were of inferior quality but high price. This was because, in the struggle against colonialism, the timely delivery of Western industrial products could not be guaranteed; after all, the British's favorite weapon was trade embargoes…

Wakatsuki Reijiro was quite shocked by Hayashi Shin's remarks. Although he knew that there was some discord between the Navy and the Army, it was too outrageous for a Navy lieutenant commander to openly criticize the Army's continental policy as a pile of rubbish in front of cabinet ministers.

He glanced at the expressions of his four colleagues and noticed that Ogawa and the other two were nodding slightly, seemingly supporting Lin Xinyi's statement. Takahashi, though thoughtful, did not show any resistance. Clearly, he did not care about such slanderous remarks against the army. What he was concerned about was the issue of the Asian trade cooperation circle proposed by Lin Xinyi.

Wakatsuki Reijiro could only suppress his discomfort. As an elite bureaucrat, he didn't actually have much affection for the military, since a large part of his financial work involved addressing the national deficit caused by military spending. Of course, as a Japanese, he was still very proud of the achievements of the Treaty of Shimonoseki.

Therefore, although Wakatsuki Reijiro had some dissatisfaction with the military, he actually held the military in considerable respect, believing it to be the guarantee of national security. Before this secret meeting, he naturally would not have imagined that a naval officer would view the army in this way, but after suppressing his discomfort and thinking it over carefully, Wakatsuki had to admit that the Asian economic and trade cooperation discussed by Lieutenant Colonel Hayashi Nobuyoshi was not a direction worth trying.

Takahashi Kiyoshi reacted more quickly than Wakatsuki. As the main person in charge of the war loan, he was more aware than Wakatsuki, a central government bureaucrat, of the unfavorable international financial market to Japan. When Japan needed to stop Russia's eastward expansion, it received strong support from British and American bankers, while the French, though indifferent, did not intervene.

However, after Russia's expansion in the Far East was thwarted, the loan terms from Britain and the United States to Japan became more stringent. They not only demanded collateral but also required Japan not to launch further attacks against Russia. In other words, Britain and the United States only opposed Russia's attempt to monopolize East Asia, but did not support Japan replacing Russia in doing so. Simply put, this war was fought by Japan for British and American capital, not for Japan itself.

Therefore, in advocating against the colonial system, Takahashi immediately and automatically placed Japan in a situation of confrontation with British and American capital, and naturally did not hesitate as much as Wakatsuki. However, he then asked Hayashi Shin'ichi: "Opposing the global colonial system led by Britain and France is not a bad thing, but can Japan really carry this banner? With our country's strength, I'm afraid we can't even defeat a squadron of the Royal Navy..."

Chapter 682

Chapter 682

　Takahashi Korekiyo's ability to consider whether Japan could withstand the British threat of war made him a relatively thoughtful Japanese compared to Hayashi Shin'ichi. In fact, most Japanese people lacked a clear stance on international issues. They were either like the common people of the Edo period, blindly believing in the power of the shogunate and daring not to have any thoughts of resistance, or they had a gambler's mentality of "overthrow the shogunate, and I will become the new shogunate."

Takahashi is one of the few Japanese who has actually lived abroad. He has a firsthand understanding of the power gap between Japan and European countries. Therefore, he has always maintained a pro-Western stance in Japan and opposed confrontation between Japan and Europe. However, once he has determined the position of the international community, he is willing to take risks. For example, in the war against Russia, Takahashi spared no effort in raising funds. He was not confident that Japan would defeat Russia, but he had a clear understanding of Russia's isolation in the international community.

Therefore, Lin Xinyi believes that it is still possible to communicate with people like Takahashi. Although these Japanese elites who have traveled abroad and seen the world have also been brainwashed by Western social Darwinism and believe that the strong rule the weak is the axiom, at least these people are willing to face reality, unlike those small farmers who have little knowledge but stubbornly reject the existence of any technology and industry that does not conform to their past knowledge. Those are the real people who cannot be communicated with.

Therefore, Lin Xinyi frankly explained the doubts raised by Takahashi: "The British Empire can be called a true empire. An empire is not one where the monarch calls himself emperor. An empire must establish an international order that enables communication in the region or most of the world. Only then can it be called an empire."

Therefore, throughout human history, only the ancient Roman Empire, the Frankish Kingdom under Charlemagne, the Ottoman Empire, and the Chinese Empire can truly be called empires. Of these four empires, only two survive to this day; the other two have long since vanished from history. The history of these four empires from their birth to their demise shows that empires are almost never destroyed by external enemies. They all perished due to internal strife, or were exploited by external enemies during periods of internal conflict.

The British Empire was the largest empire in terms of area and population in human history. Its ruling power far exceeded that of the four classical empires in human history. Even at its most powerful, the Ottoman Empire only ruled over most of the Mediterranean region. The British Empire was the only empire to reach the level of a world ruler. It even destroyed an empire that was about to take shape - the Napoleonic Empire.

Therefore, I dare say that no country could destroy the British Empire from the outside. Although the empire was past its peak, the wealth it accumulated during its century of world domination was sufficient to withstand any level of external challenge. For a small, underdeveloped country like Japan, with limited resources and a moderate population, to think it could withstand an attack from the British Empire was, of course, wishful thinking.

Therefore, the leaders who oppose the global colonial system established by the British Empire can only be the working class and the dominant ethnic groups in the colonized regions. What Japan should do is support the resistance of the working class and colonized peoples who are oppressed by the British Empire, and establish a new international order that is in line with Japan's interests in the process of such resistance.

The British Empire, in its desire to suppress resistance from its own working class and the majority of the populations in its colonies, was forced to utilize its vast accumulated wealth. Similarly, anti-imperialist actions against the British Empire also required enormous resources. Therefore, such anti-imperialist movements could create a massive market, which I believe Japan could monopolize.

Ogawa Heikichi, Hara Yoshimichi, and Abe Isoo appeared quite composed in response to Hayashi Nobuyoshi's words. This wasn't because they had immediately accepted Hayashi's propositions; rather, it was because Hayashi had repeatedly mentioned this theory over the past few years, and ultimately, he had convinced them. After all, compared to the Army's continental policy and the political party politics of the Seiyukai, Hayashi's theory at least resolved the issue of Japan's position in the international community.

Even if Japan had won the Sino-Japanese War, its position in the international community would have been very awkward. The British might have looked at China with more respect, because China could help the British Empire complete the last piece of the global puzzle. In fact, a declining but still regionally stable Chinese empire was what Britain needed. A Japan that had fully learned from the West and successfully overthrown the regional hegemon was something the British did not want to see. This would mean that East Asia would fall into long-term chaos, making it impossible for Britain to balance the region with minimal force.

The Sino-Japanese War was an example of British diplomacy going awry. While the British Empire's diplomacy may have contributed to its glory, it often went astray. However, the British Empire, being a maritime empire, could recover from setbacks by retreating and readjusting. Continental empires, on the other hand, did not have this advantage. Once a land war was lost, it was almost impossible for the army to return to its peak strength.

The Crimean War, the Afghan War, the Boer War, and the Sino-Japanese War were all, in fact, wars triggered by British diplomatic blunders. Britain supported Japan to create an adversary for the Qing Dynasty, but the British did not expect the Qing to be so corrupt. Before they could intervene, the Qing had already surrendered, which emboldened European countries to expand their ambitions in East Asia. This event is known as the Triple Intervention.

If the Sino-Japanese War had not disrupted the East Asian order, the British Indian government would not have been in such a hurry to bring Tibet under its control, thus triggering the Tibetan War and greatly stimulating the awakening of Indian national consciousness. Therefore, the establishment of the Anglo-Japanese Alliance was less about Britain supporting Japan's hegemonic position in East Asia, and more about the British using an alliance agreement to restrain Japan's external expansion in order to avoid war with Japan.

Therefore, after the Sino-Japanese War, the Japanese felt they had finally caught the last train of the great powers, and could now leave Asia and join Europe, becoming part of the European order. However, in reality, the British did not recognize Japan as part of the European order. The so-called "participation in the European order" meant that Japan could establish normal diplomatic relations with European countries and freely choose its stance. In reality, European countries, including Britain, only viewed Japan as the Ottoman Empire of East Asia, acknowledging Japan's independent status but not its right to free diplomacy.

So-called liberal diplomacy refers to the right of small European countries to choose neutrality, a right guaranteed by major powers. However, Japan clearly could not enjoy such a guarantee from major powers. This is why, when World War II broke out, the United States insisted on forcing Japan to participate rather than leaving it aside.

The Anglo-Japanese Alliance did not grant Japan equal status with European countries; Japan was merely regarded as a vassal of the British Empire. In this international environment, Japan's diplomacy could not find its place. The Japanese thought they could carry out independent diplomacy, but European countries regarded Japan as a child without independent judgment. They only cared about the British Empire's position in East Asia and did not care at all about Japan's position in East Asia.

The reason why Komura Jutaro actively promoted the army to fight this war was that his stance on the war against Russia was more firm than that of army generals such as Yamagata. Komura had realized that if Japan did not defeat a European country, its status in East Asia would not be truly recognized by European countries. At this time, people's perception of Japan was not that of a Japan that had defeated the Qing Empire, but that of a Japan that had been forced to retreat under the Triple Intervention.

The awkward diplomatic situation faced by Japan forced Ogawa Heikichi, Hara Yoshimichi, and Abe Isoo to accept Hayashi Nobuyoshi's theories after entering government service. Compared with Foreign Minister Komura's claim that defeating a European country would truly make Japan a member of Europe, Hayashi Nobuyoshi's idea of ​​destroying the current world system and rebuilding a new international order would obviously give Japan more initiative.

In the later stages of the war, the bias of Britain, the United States, and France towards Russia left Japan heavily indebted and with nothing to show for it. Not only did it fail to obtain sufficient reparations from Russia, but European countries also failed to recognize Japan as Komura had suggested. At this point, the elites who advocated leaving Asia and joining Europe could no longer continue to pursue this fantasy. Lin Xinyi's anti-Eurocentrism ideas naturally became their only diplomatic option.

Of course, for Takahashi Korekiyo and Wakatsuki Reijiro, Hayashi Nobuyoshi's words were quite shocking, especially the latter. Having risen through the ranks of the organization, Wakatsuki Reijiro was even more afraid of the system, and the current international order was constructed by the British. Opposing this international order was tantamount to opposing the British Empire, and could the British Empire be opposed? This was the same as the question of opposing the Emperor that he had never dared to consider.

Takahashi, on the other hand, was a little stronger. Although he had a pessimistic view of Britain's strength and felt that Japan would be unlikely to catch up with the prosperity of Britain even if it took a hundred years, Takahashi had at least thought about how to make Japan's economic development approach that of Britain.

Therefore, after Lin Xinyi proposed a solution instead of merely shouting slogans to overthrow the British global colonial system, Takahashi quickly calmed down and discussed with him the possibility of dismantling the British Empire's global colonial system from within.

However, it's clear that Takahashi, who only briefly lived in London, didn't have a deeper understanding of the British Empire than Lin Xinyi, who had participated in the revolution in India. The Western country Takahashi was most familiar with was actually the United States. He held similar views to other Americans regarding European countries: Europe was the root of civilization, and the United States was merely a wild continent influenced by European civilization.

Takahashi quickly realized that Lin Xinyi's understanding of British India, the core of the British Empire, even surpassed that of the British themselves; at least, he had never learned such a clear picture of British India from his British friends. Regardless of how Lin Xinyi obtained this intelligence, Takahashi had to accept the fact that Lin Xinyi's advocacy against the British global colonial system was based on reliable investigations rather than personal delusion.

Takahashi could only say: "Although I cannot judge whether Lieutenant Colonel Hayashi's description of these social problems in British India is correct, the hatred of the oppressed colonial peoples towards British imperialism is obvious. I do not deny that the Indian people had reasons and actions to rise up against the British Empire."

But how exactly can we get the working class of the British Empire, primarily those within Britain itself, to rise up against it? Logically speaking, it is precisely the existence of the British Empire that has enabled its working class to live a better life than that of the colonized nations. If Britain were to lose its overseas colonies, wouldn't its working class be worse off than they are now?

Lin Xinyi disagreed and retorted: "The British working class did not live better than the colonized peoples. Although the British working class did have a better quality of life than Indian workers, whether in terms of wages or the percentage of food in their household income, the British working class did have an advantage."

However, capitalists do not pay workers more than the value of their labor. In fact, the compensation capitalists give to the working class is always lower than the value of their labor. Even in the United States, where workers have the highest wages, we should not compare the income of British and Indian workers, but rather analyze how much compensation British workers actually receive for their labor.

Based on current social data, British capitalists were unwilling to replace their early, heavily invested steam-powered machinery, resulting in wage growth for the British working class lagging far behind that of the United States and Germany, two later-developing industrialized nations. In other words, to compete with German and American goods in the market, British capitalists actually exerted far more severe oppression on the working class than those in the US and Germany.

Even American and German workers, whose wages were higher than those of British workers, still could not compare with British workers in terms of living conditions. This was because Britain, through its global colonies, imported large quantities of cheap agricultural products from overseas colonies, thus reducing workers' living expenses without increasing wages.

Although the United States is a major agricultural country, its high tariffs force the American working class to endure higher costs for goods beyond food. The German working class is among the worst off of the three countries because Germany implements agricultural protectionism, thus preventing Germans from accessing cheaper food.

The analysis of the living expenses and labor income of the working class in the three countries above shows that the working class in industrialized countries is also ruthlessly oppressed by capitalists. Britain's overseas colonies did not alleviate the suffering of the British working class. In London, unemployed workers would immediately become homeless on the streets. Those who claim that London workers are better off than those in the colonies are merely using the most valuable period of workers as an excuse. Once workers lose their labor value, or capitalists believe that workers can no longer create labor value equivalent to that of young workers, then these workers will be kicked out by capitalists. They will either die silently in workhouses or wander the streets.

Therefore, touting that the British Empire's overseas colonies brought honor and wealth to the British people is actually nothing more than a deception of the working class, because the British working class still had no security. They had no pensions, no medical insurance, and could not even get compensation for work-related injuries. Long hours in factories greatly damaged the health of workers, and capitalists, in order to obtain more profits, were unwilling to allow workers to get normal rest.

Even British newspapers were saying that the only time an Englishman working in a factory could enjoy the sunshine was at his funeral. Because while he was alive, he couldn't enjoy the freedom of the sun. You ask why the British working class opposes the British Empire? Well, I'd like to ask you, what reason do the British working class have to defend this British Empire? The British Empire belongs to the gentlemen of the House of Lords and the House of Commons, not to the British working class. We only need to point this out to the British working class, and they will naturally rise up against this empire.”

Takahashi Seiichi couldn't find a rebuttal to Hayashi Shinichi's words. Even though he hadn't lived in London for long, he was aware of the filth and poverty of London's Lower East Side. The number of homeless people and prostitutes on the streets of London was also unbelievable for the capital of the British Empire. Even in Tokyo during the Edo period, there wouldn't be so many homeless people and prostitutes on the streets.

Wakatsuki Reijiro finally realized what was going on. He finally understood what Hayashi Shin-yi meant by advocating the working class's resistance against the British Empire. He exclaimed in surprise, "Isn't this socialist ideology? Isn't this an overreaction against the propertied class? Won't Japan descend into chaos first if we do this?"

Lin Xinyi glanced at Wakatsuki, then at the expressions of the other four, before slowly saying, "Theory always serves reality, but reality is not changed by theory. Socialism merely reflects the realities of social problems. It is not socialism that creates social unrest, but rather the people and systems that create social problems."

Compared to the Paris Commune, the French Revolution and the English Civil War actually killed far more nobles and propertied people. The Paris Commune did not behead a single emperor, but the French Revolution and the English Civil War did behead two kings. Capitalism does not talk about the bloodshed of the French Revolution and the English Civil War, but considers the Paris Commune to be bloody. This is because the primary enemy of the proletariat is capitalism, not the king.

Therefore, it's understandable that European capitalism views socialism as a monstrous threat, but for the Japanese to think the same way is simply a poor imitation. Japan's social problem lies in the excessive wealth appropriated by landlords and zaibatsu, not in the Emperor spending national wealth on personal enrichment. Therefore, Japan has no need to fear socialism; on the contrary, socialism can be a powerful tool for reforming Japan…

Chapter 683

Chapter 683

Lin Xinyi's words actually align with the current stance of Japanese elites when they view Western knowledge: Western theories are tools to transform Japan, and any theory that can make Japan strong should be adopted and used.

In fact, the Imperial Household Department and the Army are the main groups that are wary of socialist ideology. The Imperial Household Department is averse to socialist ideology because of the slander of female officials in the Imperial Household Department by people like Kotoku Shusui, who are propagators of socialist ideology. This has greatly damaged the image of the Imperial Household Department, which has led to the suppression of the news program for ordinary people hosted by Kotoku Shusui.

However, the Imperial Household Agency did not actually understand socialist ideology. They only suppressed socialists because of their hatred for people like Kotoku Shusui, since most socialists in Japan today were disciples or followers of Kotoku Shusui.

It was actually the army that was truly wary of socialist ideology, and it was only after Tanaka Giichi returned from Russia that the army began to be wary of this radicalism. In fact, what Tanaka Giichi did in Russia was similar to what Akashi Motojiro did. In order to understand Russian society, he went deep into the Russian working class and finally came to the conclusion that the Russian working class and radicalism could be used to hold Russia back during the war.

It was this ingenious plan that Tanaka presented after returning to Japan that led to the dispatch of Akashi Motojiro to Russia to incite the Russian Revolution. What was initially considered a low-probability scheme by the army's upper echelons, with some high-ranking officials believing that the nation's will was highly unified during the war and unlikely to be instigated by foreigners, turned out to be a great success.

However, the impact of the Russian Revolution on the Far East war was overshadowed by the Chinese army's surprise attack on the Trans-Siberian Railway. The Japanese people did not believe that the Russian Revolution ended the war, but rather that the Chinese cut off the Trans-Siberian Railway, thereby causing the Russian Far East army to lose its will to fight. The outbreak of the Russian Revolution was merely an excuse for the Tsarist government to end the war.

This societal perception even influenced the army itself, leading to a significant decrease in the army's evaluation of Akashi Motojiro's success. The key point, however, is that the army's high command suddenly realized that Tanaka Giichi's judgment was correct: radicalism hindered the patriotism of the military and the people, causing these radicals to develop ambitions to incite revolution and seize power during the nation's most critical moment.

Therefore, the actual leaders of the army, such as Katsura Taro and Masatake Ueshiro, immediately raised their vigilance against socialist ideology to the highest level, regarding those who spread socialist ideas as traitors who were threatening to overthrow the Empire. While the Imperial Court merely prohibited figures like Kotoku Shusui from engaging in journalism domestically, Katsura Taro and other high-ranking army officials believed that these traitors should be eliminated directly to prevent them from poisoning the minds of the Empire's youth.

Apart from the Imperial Household and the Army, most other parties held an attitude of studying, reforming, and utilizing socialist thought. Even the liberal scholars who opposed Kotoku Shusui only opposed the assertion of eliminating private ownership in socialist thought. They did not intend to kill Kotoku Shusui. The liberal scholars believed that Kotoku Shusui was actually a member of the Westernization faction, but his Western doctrines were different from their own, rather than a real conflict of interest. The biggest enemy of the Westernization faction at present was actually the conservative clan politics.

Perhaps in the early Meiji Restoration, the Satsuma-Choshu government, having just seized power, was still ideologically enlightened, which is why the opening-up faction ultimately gained political dominance. However, the purpose of the Satsuma-Choshu government's opening of the country was to maintain its rule, not to truly want Japan to be completely Westernized. Therefore, after Meiji 10, when the new government's rule began to stabilize, the Satsuma-Choshu government, or the later Choshu-Satsuma government, began to continuously suppress ideas of civil rights. The Security Ordinance promulgated in 1887 even expelled civil rights advocates from Tokyo, prohibiting them from residing in the city.

This is also the objective reason why the Saionji Cabinet took a low-key approach to the Heinin Shinbun case after taking office. The Seiyukai, which is behind the Saionji Cabinet, are people's rights advocates. They believe that the Heinin Shinbun case is actually another suppression of people's rights ideas by the feudal lords. Since the Heinin Shinbun has been disbanded and the wishes of the Imperial Household have been fulfilled, the Seiyukai will naturally not accept the army's harsher punishment of Kotoku Shusui and others.

The stance of the new tech bureaucrats toward socialist ideology generally shifts along with the stance of those in power. Because these new tech bureaucrats have not yet fully grasped the reins of power, there are naturally no unified interests that have been infringed upon by the socialists. The socialists' resistance to those in power also resonates with the psychology of the new tech bureaucrats. They also feel that the current ruling clique elders have actually hindered Japan's development, and these elders should indeed relinquish their power.

Therefore, Lin Xinyi's argument that socialist ideology could be used as a tool for national system reform was acceptable to Ogawa Heikichi, Hara Yoshimichi, and Takahashi Korekiyo. Even Wakatsuki Reijiro, among the ministers, was more inclined to maintain the existing system and advocated for minor adjustments to the national system rather than major changes.

The new technocrats generally advocate for reform of the feudal bureaucracy, though some hold more radical views, demanding the complete withdrawal of feudal bureaucrats, while others take a more moderate stance, believing that withdrawal should be gradual. Those with more radical views are mostly people who were suppressed by the feudal bureaucracy, such as Ogawa Heikichi and Hara Yoshimichi, who originally had very high starting points but were forced to give up their official positions and pursue a career as lawyers within the feudal bureaucracy.

Those with a moderate stance, like Wakatsuki Reijiro, gained the recognition of the clans through their own abilities and rose through the ranks in technical positions. Although they could not enter the decision-making level of the government, their careers were relatively smooth, so their hatred for the clan politics was not so intense.

Therefore, Wakatsuki Reijiro, whose mindset is closer to conservatism, questioned Hayashi Shin'ichi's instrumental theory, believing that the denial of private ownership by socialist thought would ultimately harm the current system of the imperial country and might even trigger a popular revolution similar to that in neighboring countries.

If the outcome of the Sino-Japanese War allowed the Japanese to begin to shed their past admiration for China, then the rise of the Wuhan regime once again corrected their derogatory views of the Chinese.

The standoff between the Wuhan regime and the Allied powers on the Yangtze River, while angering the Japanese people (since the Japanese navy suffered the greatest losses), was also seen by many Japanese as a replica of the Anglo-Satsuma War, with the Wuhan regime considered as admirable as the Satsuma Domain, which had fought against the British.

The Wuhan regime not only survived but also forced the British to compromise in the Tibet War, which led Japanese elites to increasingly praise it. In particular, the Wuhan regime's role as a mainstay in the war against Russia surprised the war observers from various countries. They believed that although the Beiyang Army performed well in the war, the core of the Chinese army was actually the Wuhan army.

According to reports from military observers from Germany and France, recognized by the major powers as land powers, the Beiyang Army was actually the best-trained army in China in terms of soldier quality. However, the best-performing Chinese army on the battlefield was the Wuhan Army. One German soldier observed that the Beiyang Army merely participated in combat, while the Wuhan Army organized the war effort. Therefore, any independent action by the Beiyang Army yielded almost no results, while even small-scale operations involving the Wuhan Army generally maintained the initiative on the battlefield.

The German assessment of the Wuhan army significantly corrected the Japanese underestimation of the Chinese army. Furthermore, the Wuhan regime's subsequent act of forcing the Qing emperor to abdicate, peacefully ending over two centuries of Manchu rule, had an even greater impact on the Japanese. Without the preceding praise for the Wuhan regime, its act of forcing the Qing emperor to abdicate would at most have been reminiscent of dynastic changes in Chinese history.

However, the Wuhan regime's previous impressive performance made it difficult for some Japanese to associate this action with the dynastic changes in Chinese history. They believed it was a major political revolution in China, comparable to the French Revolution, except that the Wuhan regime did not behead the emperor like the National Committee did.

When these Japanese elites viewed the abdication of the Qing emperor as a political revolution in China, the discussion about what changes the Chinese revolution would bring to China naturally became a topic of discussion in Japanese academic and political circles. This discussion inevitably drew comparisons to Japan's Meiji Restoration, thus creating public opinion advocating for Japan to continue its reforms.

If the rise of civil rights in the past was mainly an attempt by the defeated side in Japan's clan politics to make a comeback, which was still a struggle within the Japanese ruling class, then the current public opinion calls for a new Meiji Restoration actually reflect the sentiments of the vast majority of ordinary people. That is, the people have gathered their hearts and minds for reform by taking advantage of the revolution in a neighboring country, and are trying to make their own voice heard in politics, rather than being represented by the clans or the people's party.

Faced with these public calls for reform, bureaucrats like Wakatsuki Reijiro naturally felt threatened. They merely wanted to reduce power from those in power, not to support the public in limiting the government's power. Therefore, Wakatsuki Reijiro remained extremely wary of Hayashi Nobuyoshi's instrumentalist view of socialism, fearing it might trigger a domestic revolution.

Hayashi Shin-yi dared to speak his mind in front of five current ministers, which naturally showed that he had thought things through carefully. Therefore, when Wakatsuki Reijiro questioned him, he retorted without hesitation: "The outbreak of domestic revolution could not have been caused by socialist ideology. Since the establishment of the Meiji Restoration Government, the number of peasant uprisings has exceeded the total number of uprisings in the more than 200 years of Edo. We can't say that these peasants were incited by socialist ideology, can we?"

The social revolution that broke out in our neighboring country, led by the Wuhan Workers' Party, advocated socialist ideology. However, it emphasized that the purpose of its revolution was to get rid of the oppression of China by feudalism, imperialism, and colonialism, rather than to establish a socialist China. This shows that the revolution did not break out because the Chinese people believed in socialism, but because the social contradictions in China had become so intense that they were on the verge of exploding, which led to the victory of the Workers' Party.

If a revolution were to break out in Japan, it would be because all levels of society are extremely dissatisfied with the current system, not because they think socialism is better and therefore advocate socialist ideas to incite a revolution. This is an excuse used by those in power to avoid facing social problems and to shirk their responsibilities.

Attempting to suppress revolution by banning the spread of ideas is as absurd as trying to eliminate a problem by eliminating the person who created it. Both the Toyotomi and Tokugawa shogunates banned the spread of Christianity in Japan to maintain their rule, but this policy isolated Japan from the world, ultimately leading to the forced opening of its doors by the Black Ships. This is the historical root of Japan's current vulnerability to foreign powers.

The purpose of opening the country was to allow Japan to stay informed about global trends and prevent it from becoming a second Native American nation. How is suppressing new ideas for the selfish interests of those in power any different from the shogunate's policy of national isolation?

Although the Meiji Restoration government was rapidly establishing the legitimacy of its rule by relying on the Sino-Japanese War and the Russo-Japanese War, the impression of the country being forced to open its doors by the great powers at the end of the Edo period was still etched in the memory of the Japanese people. At this time, there was no high degree of unity between maintaining the imperial system and maintaining the right of the Yamato people to survive, and the latter was obviously a higher priority than the former.

Hayashi Shin's current position is based on the premise that opening the country was for the continuation of the Yamato people's existence. This is also the basis of the Meiji Restoration government's theory of opening the country. As a member of the system, if Tsuki Reijiro cannot oppose this point, then he is essentially openly opposing the political foundation established by the Meiji Restoration government. Once this position is exposed, it will be inevitable that he will be attacked by public opinion.

After dismantling Wakatsuki Reijiro's political stance of opposing socialist ideology and upholding the system, Hayashi Shin-yi changed the subject, saying: "We advocate overthrowing the global colonial system led by Britain and France in order to give Japan more room for development. However, overthrowing the global colonial system led by Britain and France does not mean that Japan will have room for development. Japan's room for development must be guaranteed by the new global order in order to truly obtain the opportunity for development."

Therefore, the key issue is not how to overthrow the global colonial system established by Britain and France, but how to establish a new international order that aligns with Japan's interests. The establishment of any new international order involves the protection of international trade principles; for example, the tributary system of the old Chinese empire was manifested in the tributary trade system, while today's global colonial system is based on free trade.

The core of the tributary trade was that power creates value, meaning that small countries agreed to the rule of the Chinese emperor in exchange for his rewards. However, the Chinese empire, with its agrarian society, eventually found it difficult to maintain the tributary trade system and eventually closed itself off from the world. This was tantamount to abandoning the tributary system, thus giving European powers the opportunity to invade Asia.

While today's global colonial system originated from the free trade of the Age of Exploration, this freedom only applied to merchants within the empire; merchants outside the empire were not truly free. Although the British Empire did not directly use its power to set prices for goods, it stipulated the exchange rate of the pound sterling for gold, and current international trade is based on the international gold standard.

By maintaining a fixed link with gold, the British pound forced countries to accept its value. For each country, apart from gold and the pound, its own currency could not be used for foreign trade, because currently there was only one currency in the world that could truly be freely exchanged for gold, and that was the pound. The so-called free trade at present is actually the pound freely purchasing raw materials and labor from other countries, and countries freely exchanging them for gold and pounds as their currencies, but they cannot freely purchase raw materials on the international market.

For example, the US imports raw silk from Japan, while Japan imports steel and cotton from the US. However, the yen and the dollar cannot be exchanged for gold; instead, the goods must first be converted into gold, and then the gold price is used to price the commodities. So, who ensures that the bills paid by the traders can be redeemed for gold? The answer is the City of London.