In 2004, while drafting a widely distributed policy essay in Osaka, the author identified a fundamental historical falsehood behind the commonly repeated claim of “3,000–4,000 years of Chinese civilization.” This realization became a cornerstone of his critique of historical discontinuity, communism, and fabricated civilizational narratives.

Date Published: May 21, 2017
While I was writing that essay, I realized the mistake behind the stock phrase “three thousand” or “four thousand years of China.”
As you know, on February 26, 2004, I distributed, in the form of a newspaper insert, an essay intended to summarize Osaka—the city I had chosen as the stage of my life—to all households in Osaka Prefecture that subscribed to the Nikkei newspaper.
That essay delivered an extraordinary shock to politicians and business leaders throughout Osaka.
As readers are already aware, I believe that this essay prompted the formation of the Osaka Restoration Association.
It was while writing that essay that I became aware of the error in the conventional expression “three thousand” or “four thousand years of China.”
That I was the first person to make this known publicly is something all readers already know.
What I wrote at the time—and have mentioned here several times—is that “three thousand” or “four thousand years of China” might exist in the world of Chinese cuisine.
Even that, however, is open to question.
From the standpoint of historical truth, however, this is a complete falsehood.
I realized this and conveyed it to the world.
“From Osaka to Osaka” February 26, 2004
Earlier text omitted.
At the end of the year, I happened to see Zhang Ziyi’s extraordinarily striking beauty.
In terms of talent, she is China’s Shinobu Otake; in appearance, Kumiko Goto.
It is said that beauty exists only in a single instant.
The words she uttered were also extraordinarily beautiful, overflowing with intensity.
The morning after that powerful stimulation, I realized something.
She was a “new person.”
A new person had been born in a desolate wilderness.
That is why she was so strikingly beautiful.
You may say that there is tradition in her dancing.
That kind of mistake causes one to lose sight of everything.
What you see there is not tradition.
It is the result of dance produced by communism, which shattered tradition into fragments.
At most, it is merely a matter of Chinese blood flowing within her.
The temperament of the Chinese people—whose history has been repeatedly severed by domination by other ethnic groups or advanced nations—is such that, when favorable winds blow, they raise their sails to the fullest.
Even in a grotesque form where head and torso seem disconnected, they can rush forward regardless.
Text continues.