If one controls the flow of information, people, and goods, how can individuals be brainwashed? For example, exposure to multinational cuisine sparks interest and curiosity about other countries. For the majority of Japanese people living domestically, not only food but also entertainment—such as videos and music—are things we encounter only because someone “brings” them to us.
Especially regarding foreign content, it is difficult to find what one truly desires independently without language proficiency. Some might believe it is easy to find anything on the internet. However, it is crucial to remember that much of that information is disseminated by someone who has already decided how it should be presented. This applies not only to the internet but to media as a whole.
On the other hand, it is human nature to try to present things in the best possible light when showing them to others. General media rarely shows the “ugly.” Even things perceived as ugly are encouraged by media outlets to be beautified in some way. This is because neither the creators nor the viewers proactively want to see something unpleasant.
In this dynamic, a certain force acts upon both the transmitter and the receiver: the desire to see “beautiful” things. Here, “beautiful” refers to something “acceptable” to the individual—whether through aesthetic sensibility or simple understandability.
Beauty perceived through sensibility is art; beauty perceived through understanding is a “narrative.” Often, when the ugly is beautified, it is given a narrative. Political correctness, for instance, has aspects that symbolize this dynamic toward the “beautiful.”
The absence of a narrative makes something ugly and difficult to accept. A narrative is a narrative because there is “something to tell.” There are as many stories as there are people. Yet, as it is human nature to want to see beautiful things, if there are as many stories as there are people, we naturally seek out the more beautiful narratives.
A beautiful narrative must be understandable or acceptable. This explains why people do not only favor classic success stories but also enjoy suspense and horror. People crave either more spectacular tales of success or more horrific tales of failure.
Conversely, some people desire more mundane stories. Constant exposure to extreme success or failure can be unsettling. People seek narratives where they can find peace and tranquility. In this way, narratives can give form to things that can be told—whether they are beautiful, ugly, or neither.
The act of “telling” is established when someone listens and reacts. From the perspective of brainwashing, narratives can be an incredibly powerful tool. On the other hand, critical thinking serves as a resistance and a countermeasure against such brainwashing.
Critical thinking can counter information presented as a narrative. However, that information originates from the flow of people and goods. If the source of information is seized, that is the end of it. What is likely occurring in modern society is no longer the control of information itself, but the control of the “source” of information.
Controlling the flow of people, goods, and information is synonymous with controlling the humans living within those flows. When interacting with family, friends, lovers, or colleagues—whether sharing a meal or a business meeting—is it truly possible to make every decision in daily life entirely on one’s own?
Dining requires not only the food and the server but is also influenced by information from others. In meetings, the flow of information heavily dictates decision-making. If all these elements are controlled, it becomes possible—to speak without fear of being misunderstood—to brainwash the people living within that flow.
In a broad sense, brainwashing refers to education. In a narrower sense, it includes interventions like those by the GHQ in Japan’s compulsory education after World War II. Yet, education inherently possesses an aspect of “a kind of brainwashing.” The phrase “a kind of” refers to where the purpose of that education is directed.
Brainwashing through education has a specific meaning: it aims for the formation and maintenance of social order. Conversely, “education based on brainwashing” deviates from the maintenance of social order. The former uses brainwashing as a means of education; the latter uses education as a means of brainwashing.
While this indicates a difference in purpose, that difference changes significantly depending on the timing and the perspective from which it is viewed. The GHQ’s intervention in post-war education was seen as a contribution to social order and the neutralization of a threat by the nations occupied by or hostile to the Empire of Japan. From Japan’s perspective, it was seen as war responsibility and the neutralization of defense capabilities.
the birth of Japan as a peaceful nation is founded upon education that could be called “a kind of brainwashing” in this narrow sense. This has had a profound impact on the maintenance of peace and Japan’s contributions in the post-war era. The GHQ’s intervention in Japanese education is a prime example of how perspectives shift depending on when and from what viewpoint they are examined.
