戦後期農本主義の不在理由に関する基礎的考察

Abstract

This paper aims to examine the reasons for the absence of a definition for post World War II (WWII) Agrarianism in Japan. Agrarian controversy originated in the 1930s; however, it was mainly argued after the end of WWII. This controversy was particularly argued by SAKURAI, who was a strong advocator of KOZAHA Marxist, and he asserted that agrarianism was an ideology that supported parasitic landlords and feudalistic social construction. However, other theorists relied on a broad range of perspectives on agrarian people. OKUTANI partially succeeded SAKURAI's perspective, but his main contribution was to clarify historically distinguished phases and their agrarian characteristics. ADACHI submitted a contrary angle to SAKURAI, which was not based on the ruler's perspective but that of the farmers. "Agrarian Ideology" has been confused on theoretical and sentimental cognitions around agrarianism in general, and this was the subject of MARUYAMA's paper, which was published in 1948 Due to these complicated discourses, some researchers tended to change the approaches of agrarianism into agrarian case studies. Theoretical perspectives have been abandoned gradually after the 1970s, which was the turning point, because TSUNAZAWA started treating enormous amount of agrarian without strict definition. Moreover, even today, the definition of agrarianism is not established. It goes without saying that the definition of post WWII Agrarianism is absent.