ITAGAKI
TAISUKE
"ON LIBERTY"
Gentlemen: Our Liberal Party is not yet thoroughly established as a
political organization, and therefore what I am now about to say, in
deference
to your request, must not be considered as a political exposition but
as a
private enunciation. I mention this, because I have good hopes for
the future
formation of a strong political association, and I beg you to bear this
in
mind. ...
In the Middle
Ages the system of governing divided everyone into two classes, the
samurai and
the people. The samurai occupied the position of rulers, while the
people were
the ones whom they ruled. Hereditary tradition creates common custom.
Power was
vested solely in the rulers, and the samurai made it their business to
participate in the affairs of state, so they were well versed in
political
theory; the people, on the other hand, accepted being ruled as their
lot, and
had nothing to do with affairs of state, so they were deficient in
political
theory. Since this system of government was fostered for so many years,
the
ignorant masses declined in the knowledge of political theory, and in
the end
had none at all. Though it has been said that the people of our country
never
developed political thought, this is true only of the ignorant masses.
The political
thought of the informed classes developed to a very high level. Truly
the
difference in the appreciation of politics between our informed and
ignorant
classes is as wide as the distance between heaven and earth. To
maintain
balance and harmony between them is most difficult, for as the wise add
to
their wisdom the foolish progress in their ignorance . . .
In
Western
nations political parties contend with one another, and each one tests
its
principles thoroughly. Often the intensity of party strife is conducive
to
party welfare, but this is because these parties are well established
and
mature. Since our party is newly organized and immature, we must not
follow
their example. It would be a great mistake for our new, immature party
to
thrash out its principles thoroughly and thus fall into disputes over
trifles.
. . .
The object
of our union is to institute a form of government wherein the people
shall have
a voice in public affairs. Public opinion is the axis around which
government
policy should revolve. On its prosperity or decay depends the
prosperity or
decay of the government. For its promotion and a simultaneous
inauguration of a
beneficial policy we must educate the people in politics. The means by
which
good government and the happiness of the people can be assured is for
the
governed to control their rulers through the force of public opinion
and
prevent them from using their power arbitrarily. If those who are
governed lack
political knowledge and are ignorant of the technique by which public
opinion
can be made to control their rulers, even a good government and just
laws can
suddenly degenerate into despotism and oppression, and the people will
be
deprived of their just benefits.
Good
governments depend on good people. Therefore, to reform the
government and
ensure lasting benefits from it, we should reform the national
character and
foster good people. We cannot hope for reform of the national character
so long
as the educated and the ignorant classes are so far apart in their
understanding of politics as to lack a feeling of concord with each
other.
Therefore, our party should help the educated lead the ignorant and the
ignorant
to follow the educated onward, and thus spread political understanding
and
establish the welfare of the people on a sound foundation. . . .
Our party
desires a liberal, not an interfering, government. The interference of
a
government with the private affairs of the people is due to its
ignorance of
the distinction between politics and religion or between public and
personal
matters. Government interference means the loss of independence. Our
party
should discriminate between politics and religion and oppose government
interference
with private affairs. Propagation of liberal principles by our party is
a
public, not a private, venture. Those who agree with us in public
matters are
good friends of liberty, and although they may not be in harmony with
us in
private affairs, we can still be in perfect accord with them otherwise.
On the
other hand, those who, no matter how intimate they may be with us
privately,
oppose the cause of liberty, cannot tread the same road with us.
[Itagaki, Jiyuto
shi, vol. 2, pp. 442-48; McLaren, Japanese Government
Documents, pp.
605-13]
DeBarry p.735