Volume 6 | Issue 3 | Article ID 2684 | Mar 03, 2008

The Asia-Pacific Journal | Japan Focus

From Withdrawal to Resistance. The Rhetoric of Exit in

Yoshimoto Takaaki and Karatani Kojin

Carl Cassegard

From Withdrawal to Resistance. The intriguing to discover a strand of critical

Rhetoric of Exit in Yoshimoto Takaaki and intellectuals who, despite being associated with
Karatani Kojin radical movements, tend to downplay the
importance of confronting the authorities,
Carl Cassegard insisting that protest is not the best way to
change the system. Karatani Kojin – arguably
Japan’s most famous contemporary philosopher
Abstract and critic – advocates “counter-acts” that rely
on “exiting and transcending” (choshutsuteki
This paper traces the emergence and na taiko) the trinity of “capital, nation and
development of the idea of “exit” as a form of state” rather than rebellion or confrontation.
resistance or challenge to the system in the Capitalism, in his view, will not be brought
writings of Yoshimoto Takaaki and Karatani down according to the model of the violent
Kojin. I show that the rhetoric of exit as uprisings and street fights of the classical
resistance grows out of the climate of political bourgeois revolutions, but through the gradual
disillusion in the aftermath of the political growth of alternative economies comprised of
activism of the 60s as a strategy for finding a people who have taken leave of the capitalist
potential for popular resistance. With economy. In 2000 he launched NAM (the New
Karatani’s attempt to create a social movement, Associationist Movement) to put this strategy
NAM (the New Associationist Movement), the into practice. The same year also saw the
rhetoric shifts from emphasizing a defense of release of Murakami Ryu’s novel Kibo no kuni
withdrawal from the “public” in order to elude no ekusodasu (Exodus to the land of hope),
control, towards emphasizing exit as an which portrays a wave of mass-dropouts of
offensive weapon to be used actively by social junior high school students who, disillusioned
movements in confronting the system. Today with school as well as Japan as a whole, form a
the idea of exit remains an important influence net-based enterprise called ASUNARO and
among activists and intellectuals associated embark on an “exodus” to Hokkaido, where
with social movements. At the same time, there they establish a miniature-state possessing its
is a dilemma, which stems from its paradoxical own jurisdiction and currency. Part of the
attempt to mobilize political disillusionment humiliation they inflict on the adult generation
and withdrawal from public involvement into a consists in the fact that they have not the
political force. slightest interest in rebellion or protest,
preferring instead to abandon mainstream
society. Neither NAM nor ASUNARO function
The term social movements is apt to evoke as vehicles of protest. Instead they are
demonstrations in the street, speeches, portrayed as the seeds of a possible new
petitions or other forms of public manifestation society with their own alternative organization
of discontent. Given this common view, it is and economy.

1
 6|3|0
APJ | JF

Karatani and Murakami use what I call the rhetoric enables movements to reach out to
rhetoric of exit. By that I mean a discourse that groups who are disillusioned with public
systematically makes use of terms such as involvement or who feel excluded from
“withdrawal”, “disappearance”, “desertion”, participation in the mainstream public. Such
“exodus”, or “flight” to designate a powerful groups emerged not only in the wake of the
strategy of resistance, capable of changing the perceived failure of the protest movements of
system and draining away its strength. The the 60’s. The problem is perhaps especially
idea, then, is not simply to advocate seclusion pertinent in Japan today, where the changes
or retreat to some sheltered enclave in the face brought about by globalization in the 90s have
of the evils of the worlds, but to challenge and resulted in relatively few acts of public protest,
bring about changes in the system. much of the discontent and frustration instead
taking the form of an “exit” from the
My focus here will be primarily on Karatani’s mainstream social order of groups such as
use of this rhetoric. I try to show three things. homeless, school-dropouts, social withdrawers
Firstly, that the roots of the rhetoric are deeply (hikikomori) and NEETs. [1] We shall see that
entwined with the setbacks, frustrations and both Yoshimoto and Karatani explicitly address
defeats suffered by the protest movements in the problems of such groups in their writings.
the 60s. I will do this by tracing the emergence
and development of this rhetoric in an earlier The third thing I want to show is that, while the
thinker, Yoshimoto Takaaki. In Yoshimoto’s rhetoric of exit can be found in other thinkers
writings we see the formation of an influential engaged in today’s alter-globalization
ideology that forms the background to movement, Karatani gives it a highly original
Karatani’s version of the rhetoric of exit. This is form. [2] The specificity of his version of the
an ideology emphasizing respect for rhetoric can be seen in his attempt to solve a
privatization – for the turning away from peculiar difficulty that accompanies it. If the
political involvement to the pursuit of private rhetoric is coupled to the advocacy of social
concerns – and a rejection of many of the forms movement activism, then it needs to show
of struggle and organization associated with convincingly, not only why exit constitutes a
the student sects and civic movements of the serious challenge to the arenas of society from
60’s, which the exits take place. It also needs to
show how such exits can be organized or
Secondly, I will show that the rhetoric is far consciously used as a strategy by social
from “apolitical” or escapist in the usual sense movements. To use the terms of Albert O.
of the term. In both thinkers, the rhetoric has Hirschman, social movements are commonly
functioned as a way to demonstrate continued thought to express their discontent with society
resistance or opposition against the system in a in terms of “voice” rather than “exit”, i.e.
situation in which confrontations and protests through protest rather than leaving. [3] How,
have widely been felt to be futile or discredited. then, can a social movement for exiters be
While the rhetoric may have sprung from the conceived? NAM can be seen as Karatani’s
sense of disillusionment and political apathy attempt to answer that question.
following the defeat of radical protest, from the
very start it attempted to overcome this defeat Yoshimoto Takaaki and the celebration of
by redefining withdrawal into a form of privatization
resistance. This explains why the rhetoric is
adopted by some social movements today. By Yoshimoto Takaaki (1924-), a maverick
presenting withdrawal from the public as a philosopher, poet and literary critic, is
continuation of the political struggle, the considered by many to be the perhaps most

2
 6|3|0
APJ | JF

original and influential thinker of the “New “gladly throwing away one’s life”
Left” in Japan. However, despite his association was thoroughly discredited.
with the New Left, he is often harshly critical of (Yoshimoto 1992:204)
the student activism and citizen protest
movement of the 60s. This stance is grounded
in his dislike of parties, sects and Here Yoshimoto speaks of the experience of
organizations, an attitude which commentators war and militarism, but the same words also fit
have pointed out reflects his experience as an his attitude to the radical sects of the student
adolescent of the war and war-time totalitarian movement, whose idea of fighting was similarly
mobilization, when what he calls the discredited in the course of the 60’s and early
“communal fantasy” (kyodo genso) swept away 70’s. In a speech in 1970, “The structure of
virtually the entire population in a wave of war defeat” (Haiboku no kozo), he states that three
frenzy (Murakami 2005:116f). “defeats” had a formative effect on his thought:
the defeat in the war, the setbacks of union-
activism in his youth, and the defeat in the
“Ampo-struggle”, the 1960 mass-
demonstrations against the renewal of the US-
Japan security treaty (Yoshimoto 1972b). [4]
Each defeat was a case of public involvement.
It is not farfetched to surmise that they
contributed to a sense of disillusionment in
such involvement, regardless of whether it was
called for in the name of self-sacrifice for the
emperor or proletarian mobilization under the
leadership of “progressive” intellectuals or
parties. In particular, his political involvement
in the “Ampo-struggle” led him to an extreme
disillusionment with communist and socialist
movements and intellectuals, which reinforced
and radicalized his rejection of public
participation.

Let us look at his famous debate with the

political scientist Maruyama Masao about the
security treaty crisis. In “8/15 and 5/19” (“8.15
to 5.19”, 1960), Maruyama observes that
wartime slogans such as “sacrificing the
private, serving the public” (messhi hoko) had
Yoshimoto Takaaki vanished in the postwar era without being
replaced by any genuine democratic ethos from
If you ask what sort of logic or below. Today two tendencies could be seen
thought I was aiming for during among the people: one was “privatization”, the
the postwar years, my problem pursuit of private interests coupled with
consciousness was that it was political apathy. The other is civic activism, as
absolutely necessary to construct a exemplified by the security treaty
thought of escape, a thought for demonstrations. Maruyama sees hope in the
cowards. The idea of “winning” or latter, while criticizing the former apolitical

3
 6|3|0
APJ | JF

tendency for being just as convenient for ruling Whenever we consider the postwar
elites as the old indoctrination (Maruyama era, a shared presupposition for
2005). [5] mutual understanding has been
that its foremost task is that the
“private” is more important than
the “public”, that the individuals
making up the mass of the people
are more important than the state,
or in other words that the question
what will become of “me”
tomorrow is more important than
what will become of the state
tomorrow. (Yoshimoto 1976b:405f)

Part of the background of Yoshimoto’s

championship of the private is his experience of
and resulting allergy to ideologies of
totalitarian mobilization. Only a “privatized
consciousness” is free from exalting state
authority and also from idolizing organization.
In particular, Yoshimoto points to the family
and the love-relationship (tsui genso) as
bastions against calls for “serving the public”.
Maruyama Masao [7] Yoshimoto’s affirmative stance to privacy
manifests itself in his “dislike” of political
In his angry and elegantly formulated response, parties – especially the Japanese Communist
“The End of a Fictitious System” (“Gisei no Party (JCP) – and citizen movements (shimin
shuen”, 1960), Yoshimoto heaps scorn on the undo), which “appear open but are actually
devotion to the public that Maruyama praised, closed collectives”. In his view they are
and which he sees as a legacy of the wartime emotional and trusting only in their numbers,
notion of “sacrificing the private”. Instead he lacking individuals who think for themselves
defends a retreat or exit from the public. This and all too often just follow directives from
“above”, from the party of the movement
stance takes the form of a defense of the
leaders (Yoshimoto 2002:163).
“masses” (taishu) against the criticism of
intellectuals, including a positive reevaluation
Yoshimoto is far from disparaging all forms of
of the “private self-interest” that flourished in
activism, and a question of some interest is
“the world of the black market and rubble” that what made him support some forms of activism
arose from the “confusion of defeat”. [6] The but not others. He himself promoted unions
truth is the reverse of what Maruyama claims, while working at a small factory in his youth,
he argues. It is precisely this “private sense of and even today he usually refers to labor
interest” that “forms the basis of postwar unions in positive terms, describing them as
‘democracy’” (Yoshimoto 1962, 2005). In 1972 rooted in the everyday concerns of the masses
he repeats this idea succinctly in a speech, and hence distinct from what he calls “political
“The decadence and crisis of postwar thought” movements” (Yoshimoto & Takaoka 2005:73).
(“Sengo shiso no taihai to kiki”). Similarly, he was an enthusiastic supporter of

4
 6|3|0
APJ | JF

Zengakuren, the nationwide student body that known as the Bund (Bunto), which in turn
took the lead in the anti-security treaty controlled Zengakuren. Inspired by the de-
demonstrations, and which he saw as driven by Stalinization process in the Soviet Union, the
a new sensibility that was the product of “a Bund turned aggressively against both the JCP
bloated material life”, high standards of living and the older generation of “progressive”
and hostility to organization (Yoshimoto intellectuals. Yoshimoto’s preference for
1992:34). He spoke at Zengakuren meetings in Zengakuren and dislike of “civic activists” and
December 1959 and January 1960, and “political movements” reflects the battle lines
participated in a sit-in at Shinagawa Station on of this conflict (Packard 1966:271ff). In order
June 4. Famously, he joined the Zengakuren to understand how he could combine his
students as they broke inside the National Diet sympathies for the students with an advocacy
fence on the night of June 15, addressed them of privatization, we must turn to the role played
there in a speech in the early hours of the 16th, by the experience of defeat. This experience
and was arrested in the turmoil that followed has left a decisive mark on his thought, even to
and held for two days. the extent that he uses defeat as a hallmark of
authenticity (e.g. Yoshimoto 2006:557). Defeat
is also his criterion for affirming popular
activism and union-struggles, forms of struggle
that he sees as being rooted in the masses and
doomed to defeat. [8] “Political” activism, by
contrast, floats above the mass of the people
and is led by the eternal victors, the elite
groups who never need to taste defeat. To
Yoshimoto these victors included the JCP and
the progressive intellectuals, who – like the
ideologists of the emperor system during the
war – had used high “ideals” to negate the life
of the masses and mobilize them towards war
or revolution and who, after the Ampo-struggle,
would claim that “democracy” had been saved
by their efforts (Oguma 2002:605, 638; Olsen
1992:94f; Yoshimoto 1972a and 1972b). An
episode which for Yoshimoto symbolized the
JCPs hypocrisy and betrayal of the Zengakuren
students was the 15 June 1960 street
demonstration in which the latter were beaten
bloody by the police:

Surrounding the Diet

What, in Yoshimoto’s eyes, made Zengakuren What I experienced then, and saw
so different from other movements? To begin with my own eyes, was the figure
with we must return to the specific historical of the JCP and the progressive
situation of the “Ampo”-struggle in 1960. These movement around it preventing the
struggles marked the first appearance on a masses from joining the struggle
large scale of the new left in Japan. At the time, and insisting on an “orderly”
the main organization of this new left was The demonstration, even as they
Communist League (Kyosanshugi Domei), also watched the struggling and blood-

5
 6|3|0
APJ | JF

smeared young people being methods that already failed once.

beaten by the police a mere “Won’t you join us?”, “Forget it,
hundred meters away. (Yoshimoto I’m taking my afternoon nap.”
1989:676) (Yoshimoto 1962:67)

Yoshimoto’s defence of the defeated “masses” For Yoshimoto, privatization is a justifiable,

did not necessarily imply support for the cause even commendable, reaction to political defeat.
for which they fought. Certainly, he had himself The flipside of his criticism of the hypocrisy of
been an enthusiastic participant in the struggle intellectuals is his insistence that the masses
against the Security Treaty, just as, he tells us, should be respected when they pull out of
he had been an ardent supporter of the war in politics to lick their wounds and throw
his childhood. In retrospect, however, he tends themselves into private pursuits.
to depoliticize his support for these struggles.
It is not because of their stated goals that he What emerges during the 60’s is a picture of
approves of them, but because in his view the Yoshimoto’s increasing resignation and
participants were representatives of the withdrawal from an initial stance of intense
defeated “masses”. To defend a “cause” would commitment (the war and early postwar
for him have been equal to joining in with the struggles) towards a defense of the apolitical
choir of the bureaucrats and intellectuals who masses. His skepticism towards the student
were for ever leading the masses into new movement of the late 60’s is hardly surprising
struggles in which they were bound to be considering that this movement had itself
sacrificed. To resist, it was vital for the masses become increasingly isolated from the masses –
not to be misled again and to abandon the high while the Zengakuren students of the “Ampo”-
public ideals preached to them. That would be struggle had solidarized themselves with the
the first step towards what he called general public and gained wide support in
“autonomy” (jiritsu). In 1961, the year after the return, the student sects protesting against the
Ampo-struggle, he explains why he rejected a Vietnam war often viewed the general populace
certain invitation to a political meeting: as being in “collusion” with imperialism and
with the war in Vietnam (Kosaka 2006:65).
Instead of defining radicalism in terms of
Those who think they won the revolt, as he had done in his early texts (e.g.
Ampo-struggle will certainly also Yoshimoto 1990), Yoshimoto now redefines it as
“win” the struggle about the championing the “autonomy” of the “masses”,
proposed law for preventing acts of meaning their ability to lead a life without
political violence and whatever interference or directives from elitist
struggles the future will offer. intellectuals or other authorities. In fact, his
Nothing will come out of that but defense of the “masses” is also explicitly a
thoroughgoing lack of autonomy, defense of the right to live an apolitical life. To
the fetishism of the organization, “live and die indifferently to whatever ruling
self-deceit and bureaucratic power”, he asserts, is of more weight than any
phantoms. There are certainly politician and “the basis for the thought of
times when one has to fight even ‘autonomy’” (Yoshimoto 1989:678).
while knowing defeat. That’s
simply a problem of determination. In the 70’s this “radicalism” is developed into
But no one can be forgiven for what to many was a provocative nod of
being defeated a second time using approval to post-industrial consumer society,

6
 6|3|0
APJ | JF

which he argued reflected a new stage in the Yoshimoto today repeats exactly the same
development of capitalism, “super-capitalism” argument in regard to the debate about social
(cho-shihonshugi), which Marxism had failed to withdrawal (hikikomori) which he once used to
anticipate. [9] From the point of view of “the defend the apolitical “masses” in the 60s
economic and intellectual liberation of the against Maruyama. In Withdraw! (Hikikomore,
masses”, he now argues, capitalism is “the 2002) he states unambiguously: “I cannot by
greatest work unconsciously produced in the any means give my assent to ideas that ‘social
history of mankind” and since nothing withdrawal is bad and that people who
surpassing it has yet appeared, it must be withdraw should be dragged back to society”
affirmed for the time being (ibid 1992:122f). In (ibid 2002a:19). In his opposition to the media’s
his view, the criticism of consumer society by portrayal of social withdrawal as a “problem”,
many intellectuals is still another instance of we sense his irritation at how intellectuals
their grudging and disparaging view of the disparagingly label the lifestyles of common
masses who have now finally achieved a level of people as a “problem” and his concern for each
living where they can afford a materially individual’s right to privacy. Most vehemently
affluent life. Another reason for Yoshimoto’s he turns against the value judgment that being
defense of super-capitalism is its corrosive together in society is better than keeping to
effects on his old bêtes noirs, the state and its oneself (ibid 30).
“public sphere” or civil society. As capital
undermines the idea of a homogeneous society,
individuals and families are liberated from the
grip of communal fantasy. Rather than placing
hope in “socialism” – which in Yoshimoto’s view
has always easily reverted to Stalinism or
(through tenko) fascism – he hopes that the
hierarchies and the exploitation characteristic
of the earlier stage of capitalism diagnosed by
Marx will be undermined by the movement of
capital itself through development towards an
affluent middle-class society (Yoshimoto
2002b:5, 21ff). During the 70’s and 80’s, he
also continued his aggressive campaign against Hikikomori
the hypocrisy of “civic” movements – the target
now shifting towards the movement against Behind his defense of the privatized “masses”
nuclear energy and other new social and social withdrawal is an idea that runs
movements. through his entire thinking from the 60’s till
today: a critique of intellectuals as separated
Predictably, this stance has been criticized by from the reality of the daily lives of the people.
other radicals as a shift to conservatism – some This is not the usual ethnocentric or populist
even accusing him of having himself committed idolization of the people as a homogeneous
a political conversion (tenko). On the other “nation”. Instead, his concern is for the
hand, it’s possible to point to the continuities in “masses” of present-day mass culture – the
Yoshimoto’s thought. His criticism has always myriad individuals pursuing their various daily
tended to be directed less towards capitalism private concerns – and the possible future that
than towards the “state” and the idea of self- may be taking form in these masses and which
sacrifice for the “public good” advocated by the can never be adequately represented by a pre-
postwar Japanese intelligentsia. For instance, established system of thought. The nationalist

7
 6|3|0
APJ | JF

idolization of the “people” is itself nothing but concerns of non-political citizens”, he argued,
an abstract ideology separated from this living would democracy ever take root in Japan
reality. (Maruyama 1961:172f). Arguably, Yoshimoto’s
neglect of the possibilities of such a public, that
In the discourse of the Left in Japan, could serve as an arena for challenging and
Yoshimoto’s writings have had an impact which confronting the state, goes hand in hand with
is hard to overestimate. Nevertheless, they also an overestimation of the benefits of the private
point to an impasse. While clearly being realm and the family.
concerned with how to overcome the present
stage of “super capitalism”, he is unable to Important continuities exist between Yoshimoto
suggest a strategy for how this is to be and younger thinkers like Asada Akira, who
achieved. Rejecting the old-fashioned ideas of follows Yoshimoto in arguing that freedom or
“socialism” and “revolution”, he is unable to autonomy is more effectively pursued by going
recommend anything but looking to the future along with the “schizoid” tendencies in post-
which is taking form through the privatizing industrial consumer capitalism itself, especially
tendencies of the masses (Yoshimoto & what he (following Deleuze and Guattari) calls
Takaoka 2005:200ff). But why would such the culture of “flight”, than through moralistic
privatization constitute any resistance, beyond criticism or political confrontations. The
safeguarding the integrity of the individual or paradox which I pointed to in Yoshimoto – how
the family against the wider collective? Will the can going along with the system count as
future he hopes for ever be born if the masses resistance? – reappears in Asada, who has
remain wholly private? Worse: is not the admitted that he is unable of coming up with a
pursuit of private interest equivalent to going solution (Asada 1984:80f). Furthermore, he
along meekly with the system of “super recognizes that the possibility of “flight” is
capitalism” – and was this not exactly what constrained by the imperatives of making a
Maruyama feared? These questions point to a profit inherent in capitalist production. A full
dilemma in redefining the withdrawal from liberation of the powers of flight would require
political involvement as resistance. How can a break with such production, but Asada fails to
just letting the system run its course constitute take this decisive step in his work. This idea
resistance? will be developed further by Karatani, in whose
writings we see the idea of flight as a break
Yoshimoto can easily be criticized for erecting with the capitalist economy, and in which a
a too watertight distinction between masses firm link is established between the rhetoric of
and intellectuals. There are surely tendencies exit and social movement activism.
to “intellectualize” and formulate ideals for the
public good in any group in society. The
distinction also raises questions about his own
relation to the “masses” and it is certainly
ironic that his major works are written in a
dense style and in a jargon which appears to
target primarily intellectuals. It is also easy to
criticize him for summarily conflating the
public sphere with state power, and civic
activism with state subservience. Maruyama’s
lifelong quest was to foster the growth of a
public sphere that would not be under the sway
of the state: only through the “political

8
 6|3|0
APJ | JF

affirmative of social movement activism. [10] In

early texts, from the 70’s and 80’s, his point of
departure is a search for “exteriority” in the
“intercrossing” spaces outside or between
discursive systems, states or communities. The
market provided a model for such a space. The
global market, in his view, was a liberating and
deconstructive tool that undermined the
autonomy and closure of national and local
communities. In opposition to communal space
where rules were shared, it was a space
existing in-between communities where
participants confronted each other as strangers
without presupposing common norms. It
therefore offered liberating possibilities of
otherness (Karatani 1995a:182; 1995b:143ff).

In this celebratory stance to the market and

critical stance to the state or nation, there is a
similarity to Yoshimoto and Asada. During the
80’s, however, Karatani was hardly comfortable
with the status quo. He repeatedly warned that
Japan was trapped in a complacent discursive
Karatani Kojin and the shift to activism in space that lacked exteriority (ibid 1989a:272).
the 90’s His main concern was with the closed,
amorphous system of Japanese power to which
Karatani Kojin’s (1941- ) recent thought offers he believed that the market could offer an
a novel way of grappling or dealing with the antidote. Japan’s plunge into a prolonged
dilemma which we pointed to in Yoshimoto and recession following the burst of the ‘bubble-
Asada, namely how the aspiration to work for economy in the early 90’s was therefore a
societal change could be combined with an breath of fresh air. Looking back in 1997, he
affirmation of the masses’ withdrawal from writes that he had “felt almost suffocated in
public involvement. The question is particularly Japan during the 1980s”, when people were
timely since the 90’s has been a decade in euphoric and Japanese capitalism seemed
which much discontent with the system has triumphant. With the onslaught of global
taken the form of exit – from school, marriage, capitalism in the 90’s, the “self-sustained and
the labor market or (in the case of the social self-complacent space of Japan” was gradually
withdrawal) from social life tout court. Can collapsing (ibid 1997).
such discontent be turned into effective forms With the victory of the market, however,
of resistance? Can it be channeled in ways that Karatani adopted a more critical stance
could further social change? Today questions towards it. The fall of the Berlin Wall and the
such as these have gained renewed importance. Gulf War were pivotal events in this shift.
Deconstruction, he writes, “could have critical
The thought of Karatani follows a trajectory impact only while Marxism actually ruled the
that can be described as almost the reverse of people of many nation-states. In the 1990s, this
Yoshimoto’s, with Karatani growing tendency lost its impact, having become for the
increasingly critical of capitalism and most part a mere agent of the real

9
 6|3|0
APJ | JF

deconstructive movement of capitalism”. tensions – and the organization was dissolved

Instead of going along with the in 2003. [11]
“deconstructive” movement of capitalism in
order to undermine the closure imposed by Despite its failure, a study of the ideas that led
states, he now felt that contributing something Karatani to conceive of it is instructive. What I
constructive, not in order to support find especially interesting is the extent to
mainstream society but in order to provide new which he conceived of NAM in terms of exit.
alternatives, was the urgent task (ibid The turn to movement activism and the
2003:ixf). establishment of NAM in no sense signifies an
abandonment of Karatani’s championship of
He sketched his new “constructive” endeavour people’s right to turn their back on public
in his 2001 work Toransukuritiku (published in involvement, and is better understood, I
English as Transcritique in 2003), a work on suggest, as his answer to how social
Marx and Kant which has already gained movements can be organized in an age when
considerable international attention (Cf. Zizek many have chosen to do exactly that.
2004, 2006). In this work he advocates the idea Significantly, a strong emphasis on the
of “transcritical space” serving as a crossroad individual’s right to withdrawal, privacy and
in which relations with others are possible anonymity is retained in his thought even after
without the risk of totalitarian closure. To his turn to movement activism. Although not a
Karatani, this is a model of critical thinking follower of Yoshimoto – they have criticized
that escapes the closure of system thinking as each other on a number of occasions [12] –
well as a model for possible social networking Karatani carries on the legacy of the latter
and activism in the form of “associations” that thinker in an important sense, namely in
escape the centralizing tendencies of pointing to the emancipatory aspects of
traditional hierarchical organizations and withdrawal and in the resistance to the
movements. The model is now no longer totalitarian collective, the state or the unitary
provided by the capitalist market. Even though system of thought. Unlike both Yoshimoto and
associations are just as open to strangers and Asada, however, Karatani insists on the need to
to heterogeneity as such markets, they are exit not only the state and the mainstream
entered into by a wish for mutual help, not for public sphere, but also the capitalist market.
making profit. They also lack the coercive Unlike them, he tries to affirm privatization and
mechanism of “plunder and redistribution” flight in a way that makes it possible to utilize
typical of states and the narrow-minded the rhetoric of exit for the purpose of social
intolerance and exclusion typical of the nation movement activism. On both these points,
or community. They therefore offer means of Karatani’s thinking marks a new departure in
“counter-acting” what Karatani calls the entire the development of the rhetoric of exit in Japan.
“unholy trinity of capital, nation and state”
(Karatani 2003). The rhetoric of exit in NAM

Karatani’s new activist stance is manifested in In what sense did Karatani concretely present
the founding of the New Associationist NAM as using a vehicle for “exit”? I will focus
Movement (NAM) in Osaka in June 2000, whose on four instances – the rejection of
goal was to resist this “unholy trinity”. NAM confrontation in favour of “exscendent”
numbered close to 600 members a year after its counter-acts, the ideal of impersonality, the
inauguration, but it was soon beset by various advocacy of lottery, and Karatani’s concept of
problems – a small number of members, the “public” – taking his works during recent
increasing bureaucratization and personal years, NAM’s program, pamphlets, interviews

10
 6|3|0
APJ | JF

and other texts concerning the movement as attempt by Karatani to overcome the historical
my material. legacy of “defeat” among anti-systemic
movements. Thus he criticizes traditional
(1) To overcome the limitations of previous Marxism for remaining stuck with an old-
protest movements, Karatani proposes a fashioned idea of revolution based on the
combination of strategies that are “immanent” violent street riots of the bourgeois revolutions
(naizaiteki) and “exscendent” (choshutsuteki) of the 18th and 19th centuries. The “counter-
in relation to the capitalist economic system (or action” or “counter-acts” (taiko) of NAM cannot
a combination of voice and exit to use be modelled on traditional violent revolutions.
Hirschman’s terms). The term “exscendent” is
a neologism explained to mean “exiting and
transcendent” (Karatani 2003:308 n14). Since the Puritan Revolution,
bourgeois revolutions have always
The immanent counteracts would include involved violent acts. Even some
consumer boycotts and labor strikes, i.e. direct socialist revolutions have been
confrontations waged by consumers and violent. However, that is only
workers participating in the capitalist system. because they occurred in countries
However, NAM itself never engaged in such where the bourgeois revolutions
immanent counter-acts, instead devoting (read sweeping of feudal
almost all its efforts to the exscendent or remnants) or the formation of the
external counter-acts. By this Karatani means nation-state had not yet been
activities outside the capitalist system. From completed. Still there are many
the outset NAM was launched as the germ of a regions on earth where violent
future society that would gradually replace the revolution is necessary. It is unjust
existing capitalist society, even if it required and pointless for bourgeois
“several centuries”. In particular he places his ideologues to criticize this type of
hope in the non-violent growth of alternative revolution. They are oblivious to
non-capitalist economies that could also their own pasts. But the point I
function as safety nets for activists and groups want to make is that what
disadvantaged within the capitalist system abolishes – not just regulates – the
(Karatani 2000, 2002:208f, 2003:24f, 300ff). bourgeois state (capital / state
NAM’s exscendent activities included the amalgamation) is no longer the
establishment of an alternative school in Osaka violent revolution. I would call this
for school-dropouts. Its aim was not to help other movement a counteraction
dropouts back to school but to redirect their rather than a revolution (Karatani
“exits” towards non-capitalist forms of 2003:344)
schooling and was explicitly modeled on
Murakami Ryu’s novel Kibo no kuni no
ekusodasu (Yamazumi 2001:254). This Karatani’s rejection of street uprisings and
emphasis on excendent counter-acts meant that demonstrations also implies a rejection of the
NAM was never intended to function as a tactics used by the protest movements of the
protest movement, but rather was a form of 60’s (ibid 2003:285). His relationship to those
social experiment, functioning as a forum for movements, in which he himself took part as a
studies and discussions and focusing on student, is complex. He is critical of those
cultivating long-term utopian projects. intellectuals who call for a repetition of “1968”
today and instead stresses the need to break
The avoidance of violent confrontation is an out of the “sterile cycle” of failed protest which

11
 6|3|0
APJ | JF

he sees in Japanese history. Here he implicitly therefore works as a countermeasure against

draws on Freud’s idea that a traumatized social exclusion and helps local initiatives in
patient who fails to verbalize the loss will times of scarce capital. Moreover, since there is
instead be forced to act it out symptomatically little point in accumulating Q for its own sake,
and “repeat” it. By rejecting romantic protest, Nishibe hopes that it will create a new form of
Karatani appears to call for a proper “working market in which money won’t become a “fetish”
through” of the trauma of defeat in order to or turn into what Marx called “capital”, a
bring about a genuine recovery (ibid 2005). means of generating surplus value. Finally,
since it allows a mixed use with the national
Like Yoshimoto, then, Karatani stresses the currency, Nishibe believes that it will be able to
need to recognize the experiences of the 60s as grow gradually, without needing to replace the
a “defeat”. To him, however, that does not capitalist market at once with a full-scale non-
mean that efficacious social movement activism capitalist economy (Nishibe 2001).
cannot be pursued. It is not political activism as
such that has been discredited, only the tactics Karatani’s endorsement of the Q-project
of public confrontation. reflects his wish to revive exchange
mechanisms that resemble the gift economy of
(2) The central project among NAM’s small-scale communities, but without their
exscendent activities was the so-called Q- parochialism. Since electronic currencies can
project, the establishment of LETS (Local extend over large areas, the transactions would
Economic Trading System) that would bypass – he hopes – eventually become just as
the official monetary system of Japan using an impersonal as in a capitalist market. “The death
Internet-based electronic currency called Q. of the capitalistic market economy”, he stresses
The idea of LETS was initiated by Michael “is not the death of the market economy”
Linton in Canada in 1982 and gained popularity (Karatani 2004:456).
in Japan in the late 90’s. LETS resembles a
system of reciprocal gifts, since the currency is To Karatani, the potential “market-like”
freely issued by the purchaser at the time of impersonality of Q was one of its chief
buying. As soon as a transaction is made, the advantages. To understand why, we should
amount is subtracted from the account of the recall that he has long criticized older Leftist
seller and added to the account of the buyer. movements for hewing to the idea of a
The seller thus immediately gets his or her community to which even critics must belong
money, while the “minus” post of the buyer and to which they must address their criticism.
represents his or her “debt” or commitment to “Even those who criticize […] class-society
the LETS-community. imagine a beautiful community in which people
are mutually dependent and help each other”
The Q-project – which was based on the (ibid 1989b:235). For NAM to break the hold of
theories of Nishibe Makoto, an economist from this idea, it was important to grope for some
Hokkaido University – started trading in 2001 more impersonal form of association. As
and today survives under the name LETS-Q . It mentioned, already in the 80’s Karatani started
stands out from most other LETS through its to conceive of the market as an “intercrossing”
use of an Internet-based currency and its clear space existing in-between communities and
aim to create an alternative to capitalist constituted by the interaction between
society. One advantage of Q over the official “strangers”. Such impersonality now became
national currency, Nishibe points out, is that it the ideal of Q, and even of NAM as such.
is not issued by the central bank, but by the Associations, he states, are based on contracts
“workers-as-consumers” themselves. It between mutual strangers, just like

12
 6|3|0
APJ | JF

transactions in the capitalist market (Karatani is precisely liberalism. For instance, what
& Sakabe 2001). Through such “market-like” protects discriminated minorities is the liberal
traits, associations like NAM would be able to defense of decentralization, division of powers
outgrow capitalism by utilizing tendencies and human rights, rather than the idea of
within capitalism itself. democracy stressing uniformity and the rule of
majorities. Democracy, he claims, easily lends
Modeling associations on the market economy, itself to justifying the centralization of power
Karatani can be said to mimic the tendency to and even the “sacrifice of the foreigner”. The
privatization typical of capitalist markets. [13] counterpart of the democratic idea of a
Already in Yoshimoto, we saw a defense of the government “representing” the will of people is
masses’ right to indulge in private pursuits. the idea of a public sphere in which citizens
What is new in Karatani is the attempt to express their views and become political
incorporate this pursuit into the modus “subjects”. Just like thinkers such as
operandi of a social movement. The counter- Yoshimoto, Karatani is suspicious of the latent
acts against capitalism become possible not by totalitarianism inherent in such calls for
denying privatization and resurrecting the participation, to which he opposes the freedom
sense of community and solidarity, but by to withdraw and not to be a “subject”. The
harnessing privatization to the goal of fostering freedom to keep silent, he argues, may be more
a new economy. The “solidarity” and “common important than the freedom of expression (ibid
aim” so often stressed as defining features of 1999:128f).
social movements (e.g. Melucci 1996) are
downplayed in favor of a respect for the As an example, he mentions Athenian
participants’ privacy. An illustration of this is democracy, which he believes was made
Karatani’s statement that the motive for joining possible not only by the freedom of speech but
Q is irrelevant – “it’s fine if people join for also by voter anonymity, which protected the
personal gain”. What is important is not the weak from having to confront the powerful.
moral or idealistic reasons that drive people to Equally crucial in preventing the emergence of
participate, but the growth of alternative dictators was lottery. With a few exceptions
systems as such (Karatani 2002:207, Karatani such as military commanders, magistrates and
& Suga 2005:209). [14] jurors in Athens were not elected but appointed
by lottery. Lottery, however, is an element
(3) In NAM, lottery was introduced in the final missing in contemporary democracies, which in
stage of elections to the central board. Lottery, Karatani’s view still leans towards the
Karatani argues, helps prevent organizations Schmittian idea of democracy as an organic
from constricting individual freedom (Karatani totality joining leader and people through the
2003:306). To explain, we need to turn to some fiction of “representation”. Lottery helps
of his older writings. In these he sometimes deconstruct this fiction by introducing
discusses the difference between liberalism and contingency in the election process. To avoid
democracy, which reflects his reading of Carl the fixation of power, Karatani therefore
Schmitt. It is well known that Schmitt criticizes advocates the use of lottery not only in NAM,
liberalism – a basic tenet of which is the but also in the state and in companies, parties,
establishment of a system of rights and “checks unions and other organizations (ibid 2002:118;
and balances” to prevent the centralization of Karatani & Suga 2005:191).
power – in favor of democracy, which he
defines as rule based on the identity between Here we can observe two things. Firstly, in
the ruler and the people. Karatani turns the designing the organizational structure of NAM,
tables on Schmitt, arguing that what is needed Karatani puts priority on the freedom to

13
 6|3|0
APJ | JF

withdraw and keeping ones anonymity rather What NAM aimed at was to venture out into a
than creating a sense of community or “public” in the Kantian sense. In Karatani’s
togetherness by participating in the public. usage this is the equivalent of transcritical
Secondly, we can see that his proposed system space: a space located in-between communities
of lottery bypasses “communicative action”. and, like the market, functioning as a place of
Contingency, or chance, is introduced in a way intercourse for strangers. Since this is a place
that replaces the public debate that is usually where no common rules or norms can be
thought to be the lifeblood of the public sphere. presupposed, it is better thought of as an
In both of these respects, NAM takes leave of indefinite space to which one exits than as an
the strategy of “voice”. existing arena which one joins or to which one
belongs. “Being public” is not about
(4) We have seen that Karatani in various ways participating in institutionalized forms of
champions the right to withdraw from interaction but about exiting to a space where
participation in various arenas of mainstream the “singularity” of the individual is not
society. The “exits” that NAM aimed at did not, constricted by the community. “In a
however, imply a return to private space. community, being individual is deemed being
Neither did NAM seek to participate in the private […]. For Kant, however, being
public sphere in the conventional sense. To individual is equivalent to being public – in the
what, then, did NAM try to exit? cosmopolitan sense” (ibid 101).

Karatani’s answer to this question can be found As we saw in Yoshimoto and Maruyama, the
in Transcritique, where he uses Kant to change “private masses” are often set up in opposition
the meaning of “public”. The “public” should to politically or publicly engaged “citizens”.
not be understood as linked to existing Karatani’s concept of the public avoids both of
communities, but as a space where we these categories. It has less to do with voice –
encounter others who follow a different set of free and open discussions among politically
rules. In What Is Enlightenment? Kant defines engaged “citizens” – than with exit, but this exit
the public use of reason as the use anyone can differs from that of the politically disillusioned
“make of it as a man of learning addressing the “masses” in being a political counter-act
entire reading public”, while the private use of intended to help break open the “trinity of
reason is more narrowly restricted to the use “a capital, nation and state”. As Hirschman (1970)
person may make of it in a particular civil post points out, voice is often a collective activity
or office”. As Karatani remarks, this definition that tends to be preferred in the sphere of
inverts the usual meaning of “public” and politics, whereas exit is typically a private and
“private”: “In common usage, ‘public’, as silent option employed in the market. By
opposed to ‘private’, is uttered at the level of portraying exit as a political and “public”
community or nation, but Kant considered the manifestation, Karatani calls the usefulness of
public in this sense to be the private domain” the common separation between political voice
(Karatani 2003:101). From a Kantian viewpoint, and apolitical exit into question.
then, the “public” cannot be equated to the
existing mainstream “public sphere” of national Is a social movement for exiters possible?
communities like Japan. It is not immanent to
any “system”, but always transcends borders – The picture emerging of NAM is of an
or as Kant puts it: the public use of reason is organization aspiring to exit on two levels. On
that made by a person who considers himself a the one hand, we find passages evoking a
member of a Weltbürgerschaft, as a world collective exodus from mainstream Japan. On
citizen. the other hand, in the downplaying of inner

14
 6|3|0
APJ | JF

solidarity and commitment, the stress is on a movement for constructing alternative arenas
individual exit. Although NAM as a whole – the former may well view participation in
aimed at an exit from capitalism, it also movements as well as futile. The tension in
promoted a prior, partial disengagement of NAM’s rhetoric points to a deeper difficulty or
individual members from the very idea of dilemma in the rhetoric, which seems to
togetherness. Even within NAM the ties revolve around the question whether
between members seem to have been weak and movements relying on exit rather than voice
impersonal, “like in a market” to quote are really viable.
Karatani. [15] In both of these respects, NAM
can be said to represent an attempt to establish Karatani is not the only proponent of the
a social movement that would be attractive to rhetoric of exit who is struggling with this
those disillusioned with “participation” in the problem. From a different angle it also appears
mainstream public as well as with the “inner in Michael Hardt and Antonio Negri, two
solidarity” stressed in many earlier movements. prominent advocates of exit in today’s alter-
It was Karatani’s answer to how a movement globalization movement. Before returning to
could satisfy the need of withdrawal and Karatani, it will be instructive to look at their
nevertheless have corroding and subversive attempts at a solution. Their version of the
effects on contemporary systems of control. rhetoric centres on the claim that “desertion”
and “exodus” are the most effective ways to
However, there is a tension between the two offer resistance to the newly emerging system
levels. NAM was supposed to function both as a of global governance which they call “Empire”
movement and as a shelter or sanctuary from (Hardt & Negri 2000:212). By these terms they
mainstream society where members could feel understand an evacuation of the sites of power,
secure in their privacy and no one demanded which is non-recuperable from the standpoint
that they identify with the movement. To be of capital or power. But what do the terms
convincing, the rhetoric would need to portray mean concretely? In Empire (2000) the main
a strategy of resistance that could be examples of desertion and exodus are refugees,
realistically employed even by those who have migrant labour, escaped slaves, and the mass-
given up participation in the mainstream public emigrations that triggered the fall of the Berlin
sphere, the traditional arena of social Wall. Resting on a myriad of individual
struggles. Simply withdrawing from political decisions – a “diffusion of singularities” – rather
participation in order to go along with private than organized movement, the effect of these
pursuits may be the first step to “autonomy” for desertions is said to be to silently weaken the
Yoshimoto, but from Karatani’s perspective it is system of power, undermining it rather than
not enough since it fails to break out of the fighting it. This is an idea that Virno has put
“trinity of capital, nation and state”. What is succinctly: “The State will crumble, then, not
needed is to provide an alternative arena to by a massive blow to its head, but through a
which exit can be redirected. To Karatani, this mass withdrawal from its base, evacuating its
arena was economically modeled on the idea of means of support” (Virno & Hardt 1996:261f).
LETS and politically on the idea of an
alternative, Kantian “public”. As critics have pointed out, however, the
question of whether migrants and refugees
The tension in Karatani’s rhetoric stems from qualify as an effective countermovement
the fact that it is far from clear how such against Empire is left unexplored. [16] In
redirection would occur. Those who withdraw Multitude (2004) and other recent texts the
from the mainstream social order in search of a concept of exodus tends to be broadened into a
shelter are not necessarily those who engage in metaphor of resistance as such, including voice

15
 6|3|0
APJ | JF

and public confrontation. [17] Simultaneously, social movement that is capable of being
the central image illustrating the concept shifts efficacious without operating with voice. [19]
to the mass-demonstrations of the alter-
globalization movement in Seattle and Genoa. Karatani’s solution is not free from difficulties.
[18] The result of these changes is that the He appears to imply that people simply
concept becomes more confrontational – what pursuing their private concerns within a frame
is needed is not simply to abandon or like NAM will give rise to a self-organizing
“undermine” power by depriving it of process which will erode capitalism. “When
participation and support but actively to turn bright minds start pouring into non-capitalist
against it and topple it, through “a blow to its modes of production, capital is in for trouble”
head” to use Virno’s words. This vacillation (Karatani & Murakami 2001:77). Here Karatani
indicates a basic unresolved dilemma. The appears to view the exiters as acting from a
more they stress the undermining effects of the position of strength. There is no need to
withdrawal of various subaltern groups from directly confront capitalism, since exit alone
imperial control, the thinner the link to will result in a devastating “brain-drain” which
organized resistance becomes. Conversely, the will sap its strength. This may appear overly
more they connect their theory to the present optimistic in retrospect. Apart from the fact
surge in anti-corporate and anti-war activism, that such movements have so far met with very
the more its empirical content tends to merge limited success in Japan, they are also
with the traditional movement repertoire of weakened by the fact that they lack part of the
voice and public confrontation. attraction of traditional movements. [20] For
example, against Karatani’s criticism of the
In comparison with Hardt & Negri, Karatani’s street-fighting of the 60’s, the literary critic
concept of exit is less mixed with elements of Suga Hidemi defends them for the “fun” and
voice. As in their writings, the act of exit and the human contact they brought:
the construction of a new society are conceived
of as one and the same process. To Karatani,
however, the idea of “exscendent counter-acts” I wonder if movements really can
is more than a “diffusion of singularities” and it continue if such pleasure and fun
is never used as a mere metaphor. The “trinity is lacking. Of course, I believe you
of capital, nation and state” must be are correct when you say that a
undermined by the construction and gradual genuine revolution is when
growth of alternative economic systems and the seemingly insignificant changes
increasing flow of “exiters” to these happen without people noticing
alternatives. Karatani is therefore never and the effect is only
tempted to portray exit, or “exscendent” retrospectively recognized. But
counter-acts, in a way that makes them how about the fun of crashing into
resemble the use of voice or public and shouting at people around you
confrontations typical of classical social in the process of reaching that
movements. Cultivating the project of an goal? (Karatani & Suga 2005:204f)
alternative economy is more important than
rebelling or confronting mainstream society.
The way he combines the rhetoric of exit with The price for Karatani’s solution is a diluted
movement activism is therefore entirely concept of social movement. As we have seen,
different from what we see in Hardt & Negri. NAM lacked many of the features normally
Instead of transforming the content of exit into associated with social movements – internal
that of voice, he attempts to conceive of a solidarity, confrontations with adversaries, and

16
 6|3|0
APJ | JF

an overall sense of solidarity with the rhetoric with movement activism by letting
surrounding society. While NAM proved the terms like exodus include voice and
possibility of movements using the strategy of confrontation likewise fails to address those
exit, the question of the viability of such who are disillusioned with such strategies.
movements remains in doubt.
With the anti-war movement in 2003 and
Why did Karatani advocate exit as a strategy today’s movement against “precarity”, voice in
for movements despite these difficulties? In the form of street demonstrations and street
order to understand this, it is important to pay parties has made a recovery among young
attention to the continuity relating Yoshimoto people in Japan. “Precarity” is a term used to
and Karatani. This continuity is the legacy of refer to the insecure employment conditions of
the “failure” of the 60’s. Thanks to this legacy irregular workers, such as “freeters”, part-
the following dilemma appeared: how could one timers, dispatch workers or day-laborers.
affirm the right of people to withdraw from Originating in Italy, it was introduced in Japan
politics and yet keep up appearances that one in 2005 through the activities of the NPO Remo
is somehow confronting or resisting power? in Osaka (Sakurada 2006) and popularized by
Being designed as a movement suitable for the writer Amamiya Karin (2007) and the
those disillusioned with politics, commitment General Union for Freeters (Furita Zenpan
and solidarity, NAM can be seen as an attempt Rodo Kumiai). The rhetoric of exit may appear
to answer that question. to play no role in these movements, but they do
share Yoshimoto’s and Karatani’s rejection of
NAM’s legacy and the recovery of voice tightly knit and hierarchical organizations,
their respect for privacy and heterogeneity, and
In the aftermath of political defeat in the 1960 – in the case of the “precarity” movement –
Ampo struggle, Yoshimoto developed the idea their attempt to reach out to marginalized
that the exit of “privatized” masses from public groups such as homeless people, NEETs and
involvement did not mean the death of the social withdrawers. [21] It is interesting to note
radical project but represented a new form of that several prominent activists and writers in
challenge to the system. A second watershed in the “precarity” movement – such as Asato Ken,
the rhetoric’s development occurred with the Sugita Shunsuke, Settsu Tadashi, and Yuasa
renewed upsurge of protest in the late 90’s, Makoto – are former members of or cooperated
when Karatani advocated exit as a strategy for with NAM. [22] Despite its own intentions,
social movements. Despite the differences NAM may have contributed to the blossoming
between the two thinkers – to Karatani it is not out of today’s voice movements, if not through
the privatized masses as such that threaten the its rhetoric then because it provided a place for
system, but rather movements like NAM that ideas to be exchanged and contacts to be made.
help redirect withdrawals to a Kantian “public” In that sense, even if the exits it promoted
or transcritical space – both see exit as a form never constituted effective resistance, they
of resistance. were at least a prelude to resistance.

I have argued that neither thinker is entirely

successful. Yoshimoto’s “masses” do not appear Carl Cassegard is a sociologist and research
to threaten the present system of “super fellow at the Department of Oriental and
capitalism” and the possibility of exiting the African Languages, Gothenburg University, and
“trinity of capital, nation and state” through a the author of Shock and Naturalization in
movement like NAM appears doubtful. Hardt & Contemporary Japanese Literature (Folkestone:
Negri’s alternative attempt to combine the Global Oriental, 2007). He wrote this article for

17
 6|3|0
APJ | JF

Japan Focus. Posed on March 4, 2008. feature of the “masses” since the establishment
of the state and recognizing this defeat is a
precondition for autonomy (Yoshimoto
Notes 1972a:399, 1972b).
[9] “Super capitalism” is defined as the next
[1] The term NEET (Not in Employment, stage after “capitalism” and characterized by
Education, or Training) was introduced in the fact that more than half of average income
Japan in 2004. By official definition it includes is used for consumption and that freely optional
people in the age 15-34 years (although in consumption exceeds the consumption of
reality many are older) who have withdrawn necessities. Japan began to shift towards this
from the labor market, many because they have stage around 1973 (Yoshimoto 1992:9, 14;
given up hope of employment (see for instance 2000:133f).
Genda 2005). [10] For the political radicalization of
[2] Examples of the rhetoric today include the Karatani’s thinking during the 90’s, cf
advocacy of “desertion” or “exodus” among Cassegard (2007).
thinkers in the Autonomia tradition (Paulo [11] Prominent members included Asada Akira,
Virno, Michael Hardt & Antonio Negri), of the economist Nishibe Makoto, the lawyer
“disappearance” (Hakim Bey, Jean Baudrillard), Kuchiki Sui, the artist Okazaki Kanjiro, the
or of “flight” (Asada Akira, Sakai Takashi). The musician Sakamoto Ryuichi, and critics and
notion of flight is derived from Deleuze & academics such as Komori Yoichi, Suga Hidemi,
Guattari. Kamata Tetsuya, Oji Kenta and Yamazumi
[3] Although protest is not necessarily the main Katsuhiro. Membership information is based on
activity of social movements, definitions of the the self-reporting of NAM and its successor FA
term social movement in social theory regularly (2004-03-14).
include public confrontation or contention (see [12] See their mutual criticism in Yoshimoto &
for instance della Porta & Diani 1999:14ff, Takaoka (2005:204f) and Karatani
McAdam et al 2001:5, Melucci 1996:28, (1999:148-87).
Touraine 2001:49). Hirschman himself has [13] Critics have blamed Q for building on a
never applied the concept of exit to social vision in which local currencies function as a
movements, although he admits the possibility substitute for communication (Kayama
of collective exits with resemblances to 2002:118f).
movements, as in the case of the mass- [14] It is interesting to note that there have
migrations that led to the fall of the Berlin Wall been attempts to use the “non-social” character
(Hirschman 1995). of LETS networks to provide a space for
[4] See also Yoshimoto’s personal recollections interaction and possible empowerment for
in Yoshimoto & Takaoka (2005:68-70, 138-40). social withdrawers, as in the case of Kyoto
[5] This argument is further developed in LETS, a group that collaborates with LETS-Q as
Maruyama (1965). well as with New Start Kansai, an organization
[6] For Yoshimoto’s criticism of progressive supporting social withdrawers (see Ueyama
intellectuals in general, see for instance Kazuki 2000, 2001:111-114).
(Yoshimoto 1966b:101f; 1989; 1990). The [15] Much of the interaction within NAM took
criticism of Maruyama is further developed in place via the Internet. Karatani himself
Yoshimoto (2001). confesses that he mainly interacted with the
[7] For tsui-genso, see Yoshimoto (1982). For movement “on-line” (Karatani & Murakami
his defense of the family, see e.g. Yoshimoto 2001:70).
(1966b:157f; 1976b:404). [16] Boron, for instance, criticizes the “illusory”
[8] To Yoshimoto, defeat has been a defining equation “between migration/nomadism and

18
 6|3|0
APJ | JF

liberation/revolution”, the “alchemy” that refugeization of young people), Tokyo: Ota

converts “emigration to revolution” (Boron shuppan.
2005:18, 91, 97). Other critics point to Hardt &
Negri’s failure to differentiate properly Asada, Asada (1984) Tosoron – Sukizokizzu no
between the conditions of self-chosen and boken (On flight: the adventures of the schizo-
forced migration (Raunig 2002). kids), Tokyo: Chikuma shobo.
[17] See for example the highly metaphorical
use of the term “exodus” in Alliez & Negri Boron, Atilio A. (2005) Empire and Imperialism:
(2003:114f). A Critical Reading of Michael Hardt and
[18] See for example Negri (2004:77). Antonio Negri, London & New York: Zone
[19] Karatani’s relation to Hardt & Negri is Books.
ambivalent. While referring approvingly to
Negri’s ”refusal to work” in Transcritique, in Cassegard, Carl (2007) “Exteriority and
more recent works he criticizes Hardt & Negri Transcritique: Karatani Kojin and the Impact of
for relying too much on ”movements from the 90’s”, pp 1-18, Japanese Studies 27:1.
below” and for neglecting the perspective of a
Kantian ”world-republic” (Karatani 2006). - (2008) “Japan’s Lost Decade and Its Two
[20] For the problems facing many of the LETS
Recoveries: On Sawaragi Noi, Japanese Neo-
groups founded in Japan, see Hamanishi
pop and Anti-war Activism”, in Nina Cornyetz &
(2005).
Keith Vincent (eds) Perversion and Modern
[21] For discussions of the anti-war movement
Japan: Experiments in Psychoanalysis, London
in Japan and how it differs from older Leftist
& New York: Routledge (forthcoming).
movements, see Mori (2005), Hayashi &
McKnight (2005), Cassegard (2008).
della Porta, Donatella & Diani, Mario (1999)
[22] Asato Ken (aka Tokuda Miguel) is a poet
Social Movements: An Introduction, Oxford:
who founded the network PAFF (Part-time
Blackwell.
Arbeiter Freeter Foreign Worker) and the
General Union for Freeters in 2004. Sugita
Genda, Yuji (2005) “The ‘NEET’ Problem in
Shunsuke is well-known for his writings on the
situation of freeters and publishes the journal Japan”, pp 3-5, Social Science Japan 32,
Freeter’s Free. Settsu Tadashi is former vice September.
president of the General Union for Freeters.
Yuasa Makoto – who was not a member but Hamanishi, Eiji (2005) “Shugoteki aidenteitei
participated in some of NAM’s activities - heads kara keiken undo e – Tourene gakuga moderu /
the office of the NPO Moyai which functions as shakaigakuteki kainyu ni yoru LETS–hen’yo no
a “support center for autonomous life” for jirei bunseki” (From collective identity to
homeless and other poor people. experience movement – a case study of the
transformation of LETS using Touraine’s model
of sociological intervention), Soshioroji, No.
References 154 (Nov.).

Alliez, Éric & Negri, Antonio (2003) “Peace and Hardt, Michael & Negri, Antonio (2000)
War”, pp 109-18, Theory, Culture & Society Empire, Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University
20(2). Press.
- & Negri, Antonio (2004) Multitude: War and
Amamiya, Karin (2007) Ikisasero! Nanminka Democracy in the Age of Empire, New York:
suru wakamonotachi (Let us live! The The Penguin Press.

19
 6|3|0
APJ | JF

Hirschman, Albert O. (1970) Exit, Voice, and Cambridge, Mass. & London, England: The MIT
Loyalty: Responses to Decline in Firms, Press.
Organizations, and States, Cambridge, Mass. &
London, England: Harvard University Press. - (2004) Toransukuritiku – Kanto to Markusu
(Transcritique – Kant and Marx, in the series
- (1995) “Exit, Voice, and the Fate of the Teihon Karatani Kojin Shu, vol. 3, Tokyo:
German Democratic Republic”, pp 9-43, in A Iwanami Shoten.
Propensity to Self-Subversion, Cambridge,
Mass. & London, England: Harvard University - (2005) “Kakumei to hanpuku: josetsu”
Press. (Revolution and repetition: introduction), pp
4-18, AT, Vol. 0.
Hayashi, Sharon & McKnight, Anne (2005)
“Good-bye Kitty, Hello War: The Tactics of - (2006) Sekaikyowakoku e –
Spectacle and New Youth Movements in Urban Shihon=neshon=kokka o koete (Towards a
Japan”, pp 87-113, positions 13:1. World Republic: Transcending the Capitalist
Nation-State), Tokyo: Iwanami Shoten.
Karatani, Kojin (1989a) “One Spirit, Two
Nineteenth Centuries”, pp 259-72, in Miyoshi, - & Murakami, Ryu (2001) “Jidai heisa no
M. & Harootunian, H.D. (eds.) Postmodernism toppako” (Breaking out of the closure of the
and Japan, Durham: Duke University Press. times), pp 63-118, in Karatani et al NAM Seisei
(The formation of NAM), Tokyo: Ota shuppan.
- (1989b) Tankyu II (Explorations II), Tokyo:
Kodansha. - & Sakabe, Megumi (2001) “Kanto to
Marukusu – ’toransukuritiku’ iko e” (dialogue in
- (1995a) Shuen o megutte (On the end), Tokyo: 3 parts, with part 1 accessed 05-03-29.
Kodansha gakujutsu bunko.
- & Suga, Hidemi (2005) “Seitai to shite no
- (1995b) Architecture as Metaphor: Language, kakumei” (Revolution as body correction), pp
Number, Money, Cambridge, Mass. & London, 171-226, in Suga, Hidemi (ed) Left Alone:
England: The MIT Press. Jizoku suru nyu refuto no “68 nen kakumei”
(Left alone: the “revolution of 68” of the
- (1997) “Japan is interesting because Japan is continuing new left), Tokyo: Akashi shoten.
not interesting”, lecture delivered in March
1997, reproduced on Karatani Forum: Kayama, Rika (2002) Puchinashionarizumu
(accessed on 2002-11-19). shokogun: wakamonotachi no nipponshugi (The
petit-nationalisme syndrome: the Japonisme of
- (1999) Hyumoa to shite no yuibutsuron the young), Tokyo: Chuo Koron shinsha.
(Materialism as humour), Tokyo: Kodansha
gakujutsu bunko. Kosaka, Shuhei (2006) Shiso to shite no
Zenkyoto sedai (The Zenkyoto generation as
- (2000) NAM Genri (NAM’s principles), Tokyo: thought), Tokyo: Chikuma shobo.
Ota shuppan.
Maruyama, Masao (1961) Nihon no shiso
- (2002) Nihon seishinbunseki (Psychoanalysis (Japanese thought), Tokyo: Iwanami shinsho.
of Japan), Tokyo: Bungei Shunju. - (1965) “Patterns of Individuation and the Case
of Japan: A Conceptual Scheme”, pp 489-532,
- (2003) Transcritique: On Kant and Marx, in

20
 6|3|0
APJ | JF

Jansen, M. B. (ed.) Changing Japanese Attitudes Olson, Lawrence (1992) Ambivalent Moderns:
Toward Modernization. Princeton: Princeton Portraits of Japanese Cultural Identity, Savage,
University Press. Maryland: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers.

- (2005) “8/15 and 5/19”, pp 1094-7, in Wm. Packard, III George R. (1966) Protest in Tokyo:
Theodore de Bary, Carol Gluck, and Arthur E. The Security Treaty Crisis of 1960, Princeton
Tiedemann (eds) Sources of Japanese Tradition N.J.: Princeton University Press.
(second edition): Vol. 2: 1600 to 2000, New
York: Columbia University Press. Raunig, Gerald (2002) “A War-Machine against
the Empire: On the precarious nomadism of the
McAdam, Doug & Tarrow, Sidney & Tilly, PublixTheatreCaravan”.
Charles (2001) Dynamics of Contention,
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Sakurada, Kazuya (2006) “Purekariato kyobo
noto” (Conspiracy notes for the precariate), pp
Melucci, Alberto (1996) Challenging Codes: 20-35, Impaction 151.
Collective action in the information age,
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Touraine, Alain (2001) Beyond Neoliberalism,
Cambridge: Polity Press.
Mori, Yoshitaka (2005) “Culture = Politics: the
emergence of new cultural forms of protest in Ueyama, Kazuki (2000) “Hikikomori wa
the age of freeter”, pp 17-29, Inter-Asia kekkyoku wa rodomondai da” (Social
Cultural Studies, 6:1. withdrawal is ultimately a problem of labor),
Nyusutato tsushin, 20 Nov, (accessed
Murakami, Fuminobu (2005) Postmodern, 2005-06-13).
feminist and postcolonial currents in
contemporary Japanese culture: a reading of - (2001) ’Hikikomori’ datta boku kara (From
Murakami Haruki, Yoshimoto Banana, me, a former social withdrawer), Tokyo:
Yoshimoto Takaaki and Karatani Kodansha.
Kojin, London and New York: Routledge. Virno, Paolo & Hardt, Michael (1996) “Glossary
of concepts”, in Virno, Paolo & Hardt, Michael
Murakami, Ryu (2002) Kibo no kuni no (eds) Radical Thought in Italy: A Potential
ekusodasu (Exodus to the land of hope), Politics, Minneapolis & London: University of
Bunshun bunko: Tokyo. Minnesota Press.

Negri, Antonio (2004) Negri on Negri: Antonio Yamazumi, Katsuhiro (2001) “Kibo o tsumugu
Negri in conversation with Anne gakko – nyusukuru no koso ni tsuite” (The
Dufourmantelle, New York & London: school spinning hope - on the planning of the
Routledge. new school”, pp 225-64, in Students of NAM
(eds), NAM seisei (The formation of NAM),
Nishibe, Makoto (2001) “On LETS”, (accessed Tokyo: Ota shuppan.
2002-09-02).
Yoshimoto, Takaaki (1962) Gisei no shuen (The
Oguma, Eiji (2002) "Minshu" to "Aikoku": end of a fictitious system), Tokyo: Gendai shiso-
Sengo Nihon no nashonarizumu to kokyosei sha.
(The “people” and “patriotism”: the nationalism
and public sphere of the postwar era), Tokyo: - (1966a) “Jiritsu no shisoteki kyoten” (The
Shinyosha. intellectual base of autonomy), pp23-51, in

21
 6|3|0
APJ | JF

Jiritsu no shisoteki kyoten, Tokyo: Tokuma moving?), Tokyo: Yudachisha.

shoten.
- (2000) 60 nen anpo toso to ‘shiko’ sokan
- (1966b) “Jokyo to wa nanika” (What is the zengo (The Anpo-struggle of 1960 and the
situation) (I-VI), pp 100-158, in Jiritsu no years around the founding of ‘Shiko’), Tokyo:
shisoteki kyoten, Tokyo: Tokuma shoten. Sankosha.
- (2001) Yanagita Kunio ron Maruyama Masao
- (1972a) “Jiritsu to hangyaku no kyoten” (The ron (About Yanagita Kunio, about Maruyama
basis of autonomy and revolt), pp 393-405, in Masao), Tokyo: Chikuma shobo.
Haiboku no kozo, Tokyo: Yudachisha.
- (2002a) Hikikomore - hitori no jikan o motsu
- (1972b) “Haiboku no kozo” (The structure of to iu koto (Withdraw! Possessing time of one’s
defeat), pp 406-413, in Haiboku no kozo, Tokyo: own), Tokyo: Daiwa shobo.
Yudachisha.
- (2002b) Masu imeji to taishu bunka, hai imeji
- (1976a) “Rengo sekigun jiken o megutte” to choshihonshugi (Mass image and mass
(About the United Red Army incident), pp culture, high image and super capitalism),
373-396, in Chi no kanata e, Tokyo: Yudachisha Tokyo: Sankosha.
(orig. speech held in 1972).
- (2005) “The End of a Fictitious System” (tr. of
- (1976b) “Sengo shiso no taihai to kiki – ‘Senso parts of “Gisei no shuen”), pp 1097-1100, in
ga roshutsu shite kita’” (The decay and crisis of Wm. Theodore de Bary, Carol Gluck, and
postwar thought: ‘The reappearance of the Arthur E. Tiedemann (eds) Sources of Japanese
war’), pp 397-426, in Chi no kanata e, Tokyo: Tradition (second edition): Vol. 2: 1600 to 2000,
Yudachisha. New York: Columbia University Press.

- (1982) Kyodogensoron (A theory of communal - (2006) Shoki noto (Early notes), Tokyo:
fantasy), Tokyo: Kadokawa bunko. Kobunsha.

- (1989) “Nihon no nashonarizumu” (Japan’s - (2007) “Yoshimoto Takaaki, mada kangaechu”

nationalism), pp 655-681, in Inoue Yasushi et al (Yoshimoto Takaaki, still thinking), pp 106-113,
(eds.) Showa bungaku zenshu, Vol. 27, Tokyo: Ronza 4 (April).
Shogakukan.
- & Takaoka, Ken (2005) Jidaibyo (Illness of the
- (1990) “Machu-sho shiron”, pp 57-182, in times), Tokyo: Ueitsu.
Machusho shiron Tenkoron (Essay on the
Gospel of Matthew, Essay on conversion), Zizek, Slavoj (2004) “The Parallax View”, pp
Tokyo: Kodansha. 121-34, New Left Review 25 (Jan – Feb).
- (2006) The Parallax View (Short Circuits),
- (1992) Daijokyoron – Sekai wa doko e iku no Cambridge, Mass. & London, England, The MIT
ka (On the greater situation: where is the world Press.

22