Why was germany a good template for japan new government

So, we have two formerly weak and isolated powers that now have come into their own and have shown the world that they are a force to be reckoned with. After ending isolation, Japan had a very friendly relationship with Prussia which would later come to be Germany , and Prussia was modernizing with typical German efficiency and speed.

Japan saw their progress and decided to bring direct influence from them to hopefully modernize in a similar way. So, Japan hired many Prussians and later Germans to come to Japan as advisors to aid them in modernizing. If you go to a school in Japan today, it is still based on the old Prussian system.

Look at the school uniforms. For the most part, there are military dress uniforms for boys and sailor uniforms for girls. This militaristic approach helped streamline everything to aid in faster modernization. But the relationship would sour. They were very different musicians, but two of the greatest of all time.

They were different races but realized that they had a lot to learn from each other. The two really inspired each other, but their relationship fell apart because of business. As a new imperial nation, Germany knew it had to do what all the other cool kids were doing — it had to establish foreign colonies.

Germany is in a very delicate position in Europe. It is surrounded by other powerful neighbors and has few natural resources. So, having colonies abroad would help to stabilize things at home. As the Nazi Party gained power, Hitler created strong ties with China. However, he changed course and started to view Japan as a more strategic partner in Asia.

For its part, Japan wanted to continue expanding, and saw rebuilding its relationship with Germany as beneficial to this goal. In the early stages of the war, Japan was strongly allied with Germany, but not involved militarily in the war. Their relationship was one of mutual benefit rather than a complete alliance, since Japan was more focused on exerting its influence in East Asia.

The true alliance of Japan and Germany would only come about when Japan entered the war. In response, Germany declared war on America, and thus further strengthened their relationship with Japan. The alliance between Japan and Germany during WWII may seem strange and an odd pairing which did not yield much in terms of results.

However, this alliance can be traced back to the forming of Germany and the end of isolation of Japan. Supreme Court issues a decision in U. Paramount Pictures, et al. The forerunner of the case was a antitrust lawsuit Two commuter trains and a freight train collide near Tokyo, Japan, killing more than people and injuring twice that number on May 3, It was Constitution Day in Japan when a commuter train pulled out of Mikawashima station at p.

Exxon executive Sidney Reso dies in a storage vault in New Jersey. Four days earlier, he was abducted from the driveway of his Morris Township, New Jersey, home. Reso was shot in the arm, bound and gagged, and then placed in a wooden box that was hidden in a virtually airless The hearings served as a sounding board for MacArthur and his extremist views on how the Cold War On May 3, , year-old Cari Lightner of Fair Oaks, California, is walking along a quiet road on her way to a church carnival when a car swerves out of control, striking and killing her.

Live TV. This Day In History. History Vault. Civil Rights Movement. This tradition extends today to divorce, which has reached epidemic, almost Californian, proportions, especially among young, educated couples. It must be made to look adversarial even if the two people part by mutual consent and on reasonably good terms. But all these are situations in which a relationship is to be dissolved permanently. However, when people or parties must live together, let alone when they must work together, the Japanese make sure that their relationships have at their core a mutuality of interest.

Then, whatever conflict or disagreement exists can be subsumed in the positive bond of broadly shared concerns. One of the main, though rarely voiced, reasons that the Japanese automobile companies have been reluctant to build plants in the United States is their bafflement at management-union relations in the American automobile industry. They simply cannot understand them. One usually does not have to live or work closely with a competitor; hence, competition tends to be ruthless between companies in the same field and between groups of companies—for example, between Sony and Panasonic or between Mitsui Bank and Fuji Bank.

But whenever there has to be a continuing relationship with an opponent, the Japanese tend to seek common ground. And it is here that asking the questions to which all those endless sittings are largely devoted begins to pay handsome dividends. Great care is taken by all parties that there be no damage done to common interests.

Great care is also taken that there be no final victory over the individuals or groups with whom one has to live and work. The Japanese know that to win such a war is to lose the peace. Whenever groups in Japan have to live together, both sides will be more concerned with making their conflict mutually productive than with winning in any absolute sense. Yet these same people will go all out for total victory against an opponent with whom they do not share common interests and who therefore can be destroyed.

These four habits, or rules, of competitive success—taking competitiveness seriously, considering the national interest first, making external relationships important, and not seeking final victory over opponents with whom one still has to live—are, of course, ideals and precepts.

They are normative rather than descriptive of universal practice. Every Japanese can point to dozens of cases in which the rules have been broken or disregarded with impunity.

Not every Japanese necessarily accepts them as being right. They have even, on occasion, been quite willing to inflict crushing defeats on opponents with whom they have still had to live and work. Can top management, some leaders ask, devote practically all its time to outside relationships without losing touch with the swiftly changing realities of economics, markets, and technologies?

Others grumble that efforts to find common ground with other groups, with government in particular, have led to spineless appeasement and bureaucratic arrogance. These rules, in other words, have weaknesses, limitations, shortcomings; they neither enjoy universal approval nor apply without exception.

What, then, lies behind their acceptance and success? The most common answer given in Japan as well as in the West is that these rules represent uniquely Japanese traditions and values. But this is surely not the whole answer; in fact, it is largely the wrong answer. Of course, rules of social and political behavior are part of a culture and have to fit it or at least be acceptable to it.

How the Japanese implement their rules is very Japanese indeed, but the rules themselves represent a rather than the Japanese tradition. They represent a choice among widely different, but equally traditional, alternatives.

Some of the rules, moreover, have only a questionable foundation in Japanese tradition. The present industrial harmony of Japan, though usually attributed to long-standing cultural values, is in sharp contrast to the ofttimes violent history of relations between Japanese superiors and subordinates. As late as the s that is, through the formative stage of modern Japanese industry , Japan had the worst, most disruptive, and most violent labor relations of any industrial country in the world.

For the years before modern Japan was born in the Meiji Restoration of , relations between the lords and their military retainers, the samurai, on one side and the peasant labor force on the other meant at least one bloody peasant rebellion per year.

There were more than such rebellions during the period, each of them suppressed just as bloodily. Nor is it entirely coincidental that student violence and terrorism began in Japan in the s and took their most extreme form there. If it is meaningful to speak of a Japanese cultural tradition, violence and internecine warfare are every bit as much a part of it as the quest for harmony and mutuality of interest.

These rules of economic life did not evolve in a vacuum. They were strongly opposed when first propounded and were considered quite unrealistic for a long time. The greatest figure in Japanese business history is not Eiichi Shibusawa, the man who formulated the ethos of modern Japanese society.

It is Yataro Iwasaki — , the founder and builder of Mitsubishi, who was to nineteenth-century Japan what J.