The Difference that Security Makes

The Politics of Citizenship in Postwar Japan in a Comparative Perspective

Bibliographic Data

ID15100002
AuthorsKonrad Kalicki (0000-0003-1514-0623, University of British Columbia, corresponding author), Go Murakami (0000-0001-9269-5855, University of British Columbia), Nicholas A R Fraser (0000-0002-8126-0466)
Year2013
Volume16
Issue2
Pages211-234
Publication date2013-06-01
Peer ReviewedYes
Open AccessNo
TypeARTICLE
VenueSocial Science Japan Journal (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 1369-1465 • E-ISSN: 1468-2680
PublisherOxford University Press (PUBLISHER • GB)
DOI10.1093/ssjj/jyt018
OpenAlexW2051823108
LanguageEN
Citations received2
References cited21

Upon dissolution of modern empires, post-imperial states came to different decisions about the legal status to be assigned to residents from their former colonies. Some states preserved their de facto citizenship rights, whereas other states excluded them from the new polity. Japan opted for the latter. It instituted an exclusive citizenship regime, turning (most of) its former colonial residents into foreigners. With an eye on the comparative context, this paper examines this postwar process of policymaking in light of two relevant theories-Rogers Brubaker's ideational theory and Thomas Janoski's regime theory. Its findings support Janoski's approach: the degree of incorporation of former colonial subjects explains Japan's decision better. However, the paper also argues that the exclusion of Taiwanese and particularly Korean residents was not simply determined by their inadequate institutional integration but occurred rather because they were judged to pose a security threat

Citizenship · Colonialism · De facto · Political economy · Political science · Politics · Polity · Sociology · Chinese history and philosophy · History · Japanese History and Culture · Law · Religion and Society Interactions

Tools

Open DOISci-HubOpen Access