1 The lack of an independent department of political science makes it difficult to identify the number of chairs and students of political science in Japan. It is also the major reason why, in this essay, the writer cannot deal with the teaching of political science and the professional orientations of the graduates. In fact at Japanese universities, political science is taught in various courses in different departments, sometimes by part‐time lecturers or non‐specialists.

2 Kiheiji Onozuka (1870–1944) graduated from the Tokyo Imperial University in 1895 and, after having studied in Europe, he became a professor of political science at the same university in 1901. His book entitled Outline of Political Science (in Japanese), published in 1903, was one of the first systematic books on political science in Japan. Later, in 1928, he became the president of the Tokyo Imperial University.

3 Sakuzö Yoshino (1878–1933) graduated from the Tokyo Imperial University in 1904. After teaching in Peking for three years he became an Associate Professor of the Tokyo Imperial University. He then studied in Europe and America for three years, becoming a full professor. He published many articles in various magazines and newspapers proposing universal suffrage and the limitation of privileges in the House of Peers and the Privy Council.

4 As for the broader cultural background related to Westernism, see Ishida, Takeshi, ‘Westernism and Western “Isms” in Modern Japan’, History of European Ideas, Vol. 1, No. 4, 1981 Google Scholar. This article will become a chapter of my forthcoming book, Change and Continuity in Japanese Political Culture, to be published by Transaction Inc., New Jersey.

5 As a rule all classes, even in higher education, are conducted in Japanese. That is why there are very few foreign professors except for those who teach foreign languages. Moreover there is a rule that a foreigner cannot be a professor at a national university because the position is one of government employee. This situation makes it impossible for ordinary students to be in contact with foreign scholars on a daily basis.

6 Readers can find a more detailed treatment of political science in Japan written by another political scientist, younger than this writer. See Takashi Inoguchi, ‘Political Science in Japan’, International Handbook of Political Science, William G. Andrews (ed.), to be published by Greenwood Press. It is extremely useful because it deals with subjects such as the teaching of political science in Japanese universities and major individual works by Japanese political scientists, which cannot be handled in this essay.

7 Maruyama, Masao, Thought and Behaviour in Modern Japanese Politics, London and New York, Oxford University Press, 1959 Google Scholar.

8 Easton, David, ‘The New Revolution in Political Science’, American Political Science Review, Vol. LXIII, No. 4, 12 1969.Google Scholar

9 Out of 850 members approximately 10 per cent are still on the graduate school level, and there must be some established political scientists who are not members of the Association, because if a member fails to pay the membership fee for more than two years he or she is automatically expelled. On the other hand among members of the Association there are some scholars in neighbouring disciplines such as sociology and constitutional law. There is another association among specialists in international relations, named the Japan Association of International Relations (founded in 1956), with approximately 1000 members, many of whom are at the same time members of JPSA. Also not a few members of JPSA are members of the Japan Association of Public Administration (with approximately 300 members) which was established in 1950 by scholars in the field and people actually working in public administration.

10 The same problem occurs with the Chinese (and Japanese) terms used to translate ‘liberalism’. When Mao Tse‐tung wrote an article entitled ‘Combat liberalism’ in 1937, what he criticized had nothing to do with liberalism in a Western sense. Instead it was simply the attitudes which justify a pursuit of particular interest against the common good.

11 For more detail concerned with intercultural dialogue, see Ishida, Takeshi, ‘The Significance of Intercultural Dialogue’, Bulletin of peace Research, Universitetsforlet, Vol. 12, No. 2, 05 1981.Google Scholar