Articles , Books and Media

In the second installment of this series, it was discussed that a nation is constituted by a complex amalgamation of memory, emotion, and values. While it is acknowledged that some argue the essence of national unity should be grounded in shared civil rights and duties, it is evident that democratic membership cannot be arbitrarily assigned. Moreover, a shared language serves as a fundamental prerequisite for meaningful discourse. Even in the United States, a nation founded on democratic principles, the nation-state emerged as a unit based on shared historical memory. Therefore, the collective national feeling arising from shared historical memory cannot be disregarded. Additionally, the values upon which this memory is constructed, selected from past events, must be consciously recognized in the practical observation of democratic politics.

This complex of memory, emotion, and values is undoubtedly influenced by various domestic and international institutions and the prevailing power dynamics. However, for a group or individual to maintain its identity, some degree of consistency must be preserved. This consistency corresponds to what is termed “personality” in psychology and “identity” in the context of a group.

What is earnestly anticipated from the East Asia Reconciliation International Film Festival is the emergence of a film that portrays a scenario where, in one scene, a Japanese person weeps while a Korean silently observes, and in the next, a Korean weeps while a Japanese silently observes, with this sequence repeating several times, culminating in a shared moment of weeping. The creation of such a historical drama is conceivable. Even those who acknowledge its possibility have pointed out that while the concept is easy to propose, the development of the storyline is challenging, production costs are substantial, and the market is relatively small.

Nonetheless, there is an undeniable demand for such unprecedented dramas, conscious of the future and regional publicness. Theoretical examination and corresponding political will are indispensable to realize this. In an era where the world is grappling with the nature of democracy, this endeavor is timely.

The focus of Reconciliation Studies is on how shared emotions and memories, integral to group formation through “empathy,” function socially and politically in conjunction with shared values. The distinction between a group of “close-knit” companions and a functional group is evident to all. Domestic democracy becomes vibrant when it consciously addresses not only industry and corporate interests, disparities, and welfare issues but also how it responds to the anxieties of its citizens, engaging with their shared emotions, values, and memories.

We live in an era where the people, as a composite of memory, emotion, and values, are the sovereign. While “the land of the rising sun” existed during the Edo period, so did a hierarchical class system. Today, as human beings and citizens, “we” share rights and duties equally, exercising representative rights through elections, albeit surrounded by various disparities. The process of constructing such a civil society over a long history involved wars and “restorations.” Even now, ongoing events continually create the people, centering on the issue of who is suitable to be a representative, as seen in sports spectatorship and international comparisons of COVID-19 measures.

Nationalism is a significant theme in International Relations Studies; however, comprehensive research has been insufficient. In both Japan and South Korea, engaging with so-called “war,” “colonialism,” “emperor,” and “constitution” touches on taboos and sacred matters, attracting criticism from both sides, leading to a “mud-slinging” situation. This results in doubts about one’s character and potential distancing from all factions.

Upon reflection, Reconciliation Studies do not necessarily aim directly at reconciliation. Amid the tension between the debates of order versus justice, it seeks to be an intellectual infrastructure that bridges and promotes dialogue among societal groups without any intention of dialogue or among conflicting peoples.

At the root of antagonism lies the attitude and emotion of “I am right,” and justice involves “law” and “rights.” These are supported by “values” intertwined with historical memory. The values chosen by each nation from historical experiences, such as peace and human rights, support democratic institutions and are integrated with national memory. For Japanese people, the assertion of adherence to international law arises from the underlying values of “peace” and “prosperity,” while for Koreans, the advocacy for the relief of “human rights victims” is based on the values of “freedom” and “dignity.”

“Peaceful change of the status quo” has been a major theme in International Relations Studies since E.H. Carr, and what South Korea seeks is likely this. The difficulty lies in that, through the logic of “justice” relief rather than traditional power expansion, the South Korean people are effectively seeking a peaceful change of the status quo.

Note: This text was originally published in Toki no Hōrei. Minor editorial discrepancies may exist between this version and the published article.