As always, Prof. Fujiwara's argument was interesting. Several comments came to
mind, which I hope will not derail the line of debate. I was very much puzzled
with the way the fiftieth anniversary of the end of the War was used at least by
politicians as a tool to advance their positions in domestic partisan/factional
power struggles. T. Reid's recent talk on the subject at Harvard made
me realize what a great opportunity had been wasted.

(1) However, with great fanfare, Iwanami Shoten announced that it is publishing
the collected works of Maruyama Masao, indisputably the beacon of the post-war
enlightenment movement to which Fujiwara-San was referring. My puzzle is simple:
why now? Is this a futile attempt to rekindle the ashes of the postwar
intellectual movement? I'm still bewildered.

(2) My impression of the problems with the postwar enlightenment movement was
that it was backward looking and was really a domestic debate. It encouraged the
Japanese people to ask themselves who put them through such a terrible
experience and blame the Japanese system and political elites. In other words,
it was all right for Japanese (readers) to feel victimized and regard themselves
as sufferers. This also means that it was really a domestic debate with very
little sensitivity to the effects of the debate to neighboring states. Thus the
domestic debate was always about history and not linked to future Japanese
policies in the Asian-Pacific region.

(3) The way the postwar enlightenment movement couched the debate, I think,
contained the seeds of its own demise. As people pass away and as the strategic
element of Japan's recognizing of the past becomes more important, the legacy of
the postwar enlightenment movement offers no guidance. Rather, to me, its legacy
allowed a good occasion (the fiftieth anniversary) to digress into domestic
factional struggles and outbursts of "victimization" sentiment instead of how to
face the past to build strategic (maybe not necessarily good) relations with
neighboring countries in the future. Thus the first puzzle, why publish Maruyama
now?

I should stop here, for my understanding of the postwar enlightenment movement
is primitive, to say the most, and my information of domestic debates of this
year is sparse. But I hope this invites the participation of those more
qualified. Or, as ususal, maybe I am too negative toward the postwar enlightment
movement.

Nobuhiro Hiwatari