The Imperial Rescript on Education was not originally a law, but rather Emperor Meiji’s moral appeal to the nation.
Yet in the postwar era, the Diet abolished it, severing morality and patriotism from the core of education.
As a result, Japanese society lost a vital spiritual foundation, and the absence of virtue spread into politics, journalism, and the media.

2019-05-29
This is precisely why so many members of the Diet, led above all by opposition lawmakers, are vulgar wretches and shameless women devoid of moral virtue…
Who can say that this was not one of the remote causes behind the crime committed in Kawasaki by a person utterly unworthy of being called Japanese.

The following is a continuation of the previous chapter.
The Imperial Rescript on Education cannot be abolished.
This chapter too is filled with facts that, like myself, the vast majority of the Japanese people are learning for the first time.
Something even more tragic happened to the Imperial Rescript on Education.
The Meiji government was extremely cautious regarding the Imperial Rescript on Education promulgated in Meiji 23 (1890).
The original draft of the Rescript was written by Inoue Kowashi (Note 1), and the final draft was completed in consultation with Motoda Nagazane, a Confucian scholar close to the Emperor.
Inoue Kowashi prepared the draft based on his conviction that no words should be used that might evoke any specific religious sect or creed.
Also, out of concern that the advanced nations might think Japan had promulgated something akin to a new religion, the Meiji government ordered leading scholars of the time to translate the Imperial Rescript on Education.
It was translated into English, French, German, Chinese, and many other languages.
Yet no country objected.
At first, the Occupation forces did not say that the Rescript contained anything objectionable.
However, scholars connected with the University of Tokyo and others said that the Imperial Rescript on Education led to militarism, and the Occupation authorities, who did not understand the matter, simply thought, “Is that so?”
As I touched on in the section concerning the purge directives, the legislators were all terrified of being purged.
Therefore, when they were informed that the Occupation forces regarded the Imperial Rescript on Education as “militaristic,” they had no choice but to agree, because they were afraid of being purged.
The Fundamental Law of Education was enacted in Shōwa 22 (1947), but at that time the Imperial Rescript on Education had not yet been abolished.
Accordingly, there was no need to state separately within the Fundamental Law of Education the morality and patriotism that were already written in the Imperial Rescript on Education.
After the Imperial Rescript on Education was abolished, however, morality and patriotism were completely stripped away from what had originally been meant to be completed by the twin wheels of the “Imperial Rescript on Education” and the “Fundamental Law of Education.”
A two-wheeled vehicle became a one-wheeled vehicle, and education concerning spiritual matters disappeared.
That continued to work harm for a very long time, and only with the revision of the Fundamental Law of Education under the Shinzō Abe Cabinet did we finally begin to recover what had been lost.
I believe the abolition of the Imperial Rescript on Education had an enormous impact.
When I was in university and returned to my hometown during summer vacation, I went to the barber I had frequented since childhood.
The owner, a man named Mr. Yaguchi, lamented, “This is a real problem.
Now that the Imperial Rescript on Education is gone, I can no longer scold children.”
Even if one wanted to tell them to honor their parents, one could no longer say so, because what had been written in the Imperial Rescript on Education had been abolished by the Diet.
“Be filial to your parents, be affectionate to your brothers and sisters, let husband and wife be harmonious, and let friends trust one another” was all abolished as well, and so even marital quarrels never cease.
To abolish moral precepts was a foolish thing.
The Imperial Rescript on Education was not what is ordinarily called a law.
Because it was understood as the words of His Majesty the Emperor, only the Emperor’s own signature and seal were affixed, and the names of the Ministers of State were not countersigned.
In other words, Emperor Meiji expressed his wishes concerning morality and said, in effect, let us all, like myself, hold morality in high esteem.
The nature of the Imperial Rescript on Education was of a kind similar to the words of Shinran Shōnin or Nichiren Shōnin.
Because it was the personal conviction of His Majesty the Emperor, it was fundamentally absurd for the Diet to abolish it when it was not even a statute.
Even before the war, there had been a time when the Imperial Rescript on Education became an issue.
When the constitutional scholar Tatsukichi Minobe became embroiled in controversy over the “Emperor Organ Theory,” he said, “The Imperial Rescript on Education is also the Emperor’s word as an organ of the state,” and this provoked a major backlash over whether morality was in fact law.
However, Minobe, being a jurist after all, quickly realized that it was not law and withdrew his earlier statement.
Thus, even Minobe acknowledged that the Imperial Rescript on Education was not law.
To have abolished that Imperial Rescript on Education, then, means that the Diet officially abolished moral virtue.
That is why so many members of the Diet, led above all by opposition lawmakers, are vulgar wretches and shameless women lacking moral virtue.
Needless to say, the same is true of the world of public discourse and the media.
And who can say that this was not one of the remote causes behind yesterday’s crime in Kawasaki, committed by a person utterly devoid of moral virtue and utterly unworthy of being called Japanese.
As in the prewar period, it may be difficult to teach the Imperial Rescript on Education in every public school, or to have principals read it aloud.
However, since something that must not have been abolished, indeed something that could not be abolished, was abolished, the Diet ought to pass a resolution abolishing the decree that abolished the Imperial Rescript on Education.
(Note 1) Inoue Kowashi (1843–1895), statesman.
A former retainer of the Kumamoto domain.
Under Hirobumi Itō, he took part in drafting the Constitution of the Empire of Japan and the Imperial Household Law, and was involved in drafting many imperial rescripts and laws, including the Imperial Rescript on Education and the Imperial Rescript to Soldiers and Sailors.
To be continued.