“Conservatism” Without Reason: Rediscovering True Conservatism
In recent years, discourse and movements calling themselves “conservative” have become prominent on the internet and in the media. Among them, a so-called “social reform police” YouTuber gained attention by using a megaphone on the street to aggressively denounce those he deemed immoral, spreading videos of these confrontations. Later, this individual ran for a city council seat while identifying as a conservative, and although he lost, he garnered a surprisingly high number of votes.
Furthermore, in the online space, extremist nationalist discourse is spreading. While it often puts forward strong patriotism or anti-leftist arguments, its words and actions tend to be emotional and extreme, with a tendency to prioritize hostility and denunciation over debate.
However, if viewed calmly, these actions—such as denunciation with a megaphone or the public exposure of personal information—are close to the methods once favored by leftist activists. Moreover, they are the exact opposite of the spirit of reason and order that true conservatism values. This is where the distortion of the word “conservative” in Japan is symbolically manifested.
Why has Japanese conservatism become “distorted”?
To understand the “distorted conservatism” of modern Japan, one must look at the transition of the post-war discourse space. The influence of GHQ’s occupation policy and the post-war leftist movement long dominated Japanese academia, the educational sector, and the mass media, with self-deprecating historical views and leftist/liberal ideologies becoming established as the dominant values.
The end of the Cold War, the intensification of the international situation, and long-term economic stagnation and anxiety about the future spread through society. The second Shinzo Abe administration, which was born in 2012, aimed to break through this impasse by advocating for an “escape from the post-war regime” and attempting reforms from a conservative standpoint. There was a clear direction to rebuild the national security system and restore Japan’s status in the international community.
After that, in the discourse space of society as a whole, rational conservatism and emotional nationalism began to coexist under the same name of “conservatism.” Eventually, the word “conservatism” transformed into a situation where it was gradually perceived as synonymous with anti-leftism. The influence of traditional media such as terrestrial television and newspapers declined, and the expansion of the internet space allowed extremist nationalist discourse, which had previously been on the periphery, to be spread directly. As a result, an era has arrived where even extremist arguments that differ from the original conservative ideology that values order and tradition are called “conservative.”
True Conservatism: Reason, Order, Tradition, Patriotism, and Realism
Modern conservatism takes as one of its starting points Edmund Burke (UK, 1729–1797) sounding the alarm on the radicalism of the French Revolution, and that thought has been inherited to this day as a universal conservative philosophy.
Conservatism is not emotional criticism of the system. It is a philosophy of reason that values order, institutions, and tradition, and above all, it stands on a position of realism. And it is deeply linked to a patriotic stance of protecting the integration of the nation-state and tradition, and maintaining social stability. Traditions and institutions contain wisdom accumulated through trial and error over a long period of time. If one ignores this and carries out radical reforms, there is a danger that unexpected side effects will throw society into chaos.
From this perspective, the 21st-century Brexit can also be understood as an expression of a conservative stance to protect parliamentary sovereignty and the governing power of the nation-state against the radical tide of globalism, and to reclaim political decisions based on national consensus. That is precisely why conservatism emphasizes respecting institutions and customs inherited from the past, and after discerning their roles and meanings, proceeding with gradual and realistic reforms.
What to protect, what to change: Distinguishing from vested interests
What true conservatism respects is not “oldness” itself. Institutions and traditions have been protected precisely because they have contributed to the maintenance of community order and brought about social stability; if they lose that role and become an existence that hinders the development of the community, it is considered that they should no longer be maintained in the name of conservatism.
Therefore, conservatism draws a line between mere refusal of change and the preservation of vested interests. What is important is to manage change within order and protect the sustainability of society while utilizing the wisdom of tradition.
The experience of British conservatism: Distinguishing between what to protect and what to change
British conservatism has consistently protected the following three things.
The Monarchy (Constitutional Monarchy)
Parliamentary Democracy
Common Law (Customary Law)
On the other hand, it has pursued bold reforms in other areas.
19th Century Electoral Reform: Expansion of Suffrage and Promotion of Democratization
20th Century Welfare State Policies: Development of Labor Conditions and Social Security Systems
Structural Reform Under the Thatcher Administration: Privatization of State-Owned Enterprises and Deregulation
In this way, British conservatism has distinguished between “what to protect” and “what to change,” accumulating institutional reforms without destroying order.
The Direction of Sound Conservatism in Modern Japan
From the perspective of conservatism, it would be reasonable to argue that the direction of sound conservatism in modern Japan should first involve establishing a system capable of appropriately exercising the right of self-defense recognized by international law. To that end, constitutional amendment should be considered with the aim of fundamentally reviewing the security system that still carries the constraints of the postwar era, and establishing a realistic mechanism to protect the nation's existence while respecting the ideals of postwar pacifism.
Furthermore, in economic policy, it would be a natural task from a conservative standpoint to balance the breaking of vested interests with the assurance of social justice, regaining a sense of balance that is not biased toward excessive market fundamentalism or state interventionism. For all these issues, it is important that they be presented as a design for governance based on reason and experience, rather than emotional slogans.
Conclusion: Toward a Rediscovery of Reason and Tradition
True conservatism is not synonymous with emotional criticism of the system or mere backlash against postwar democracy. It is a spirit that values reason over emotion, protects order and tradition while fearlessly changing what needs to be changed, and is also an ideology that defends the community against the waves of excessive cosmopolitanism and globalism.
Above all, conservatism is an ideology of realism; it does not impose ideals but seeks realistic solutions based on historical experience and social continuity.
For Japan to regain its decisiveness and the power of sustainable governance, a perspective that respects the wisdom of tradition while advancing gradual reform in the name of reason is essential. This true conservatism will be the key to breaking away from postwar democracy and making calm, realistic judgments without falling into fanatical nationalism.
Recommended Reading
John Curtis All Articles Link Collection ▶ An Entrance to Understanding South Korea and East Asia
👉 Click here for links