Any attempt to understand the Japanese must begin with their version of what it means to“take one's proper station。”Their reliance upon order and hierarchy and our faith in freedom and equality are poles apart and it is hard for us to give hierarchy its just due as a possible social mechanism。Japan's confidence in hierarchy is basic in her whole notion of man's relation to his fellow man and of man's relation to the State and it is only by describing some of their national institutions like the family，the State，reli-gious and economic life that it is possible for us to understand their view of life。
The Japanese have seen the whole problem of international relations in terms of their version of hierarchy just as they have seen their internal problems in the same light。For the last decade they have pictured themselves as attaining the apex of that pyramid，and now that this position belongs instead to the Western Nations，their view of hierarchy just as certainly underlies their acceptance of the present dispensation。Their international documents have constantly stated the weight they attach to it。The preamble to the Tripar-tite Pact with Germany and Italy which Japan signed in 1940 reads：“The Governments of Japan，Germany and Italy consider it as the condition precedent to any lasting peace that all nations of the world be given each its proper station……”and the Imperial Rescript giv-en on the signing of the Pact said the same thing again：
To enhance our great righteousness in all the earth and to make of the world one household is the great injunction bequeathed by our Imperial Ancestors and we lay this to heart day and night。In the stupendous crisis now confronting the world it ap-pears that war and confusion will be endlessly aggravated and mankind suffer incal-culable disasters。We fervently hope that disturbances will cease and peace be restored as soon as possible……We are therefore deeply gratified that this pact has been conclu-ded between the Three Powers。
The task of enabling each nation to find its proper place and all individuals to live in peace and security is of the greatest magnitude。It is unparalleled in history。This goal it still far distant……
On the very day of the attack on Pearl Harbor，too，the Japanese envoys handed to Secretary of State Cordell Hull a most explicit statement on this point：
It is the immutable policy of the Japanese Government…to enable each nation to find its proper place in the world……The Japanese Government cannot tolerate the perpetuation of the present situation since it runs directly counter to Japan's funda-mental policy to enable each nation to enjoy its proper station in the world。
This Japanese memorandum was in response to Secretary Hull's a few days previous which had invoked American principles just as basic and honored in the United States as hierarchy is in Japan。Secretary Hull enumerated four：inviolability of sovereignty and of territorial integrity；nonintervention in other nations'internal affairs；reliance on interna-tional co-operation and conciliation；and the principle of equality。These are all major points in the American faith in equal and inviolable rights and are the principles on which we believe daily life should be based no less than international relations。Equality is the highest，most moral American basis for hopes for a better world。It means to us freedom from tyranny，from interference，and from unwanted impositions。It means e-quality before the law and the right to better one's condition in life。It is the basis for the rights of man as they are organized in the world we know。We uphold the virtue of e-quality even when we violate it and we fight hierarchy with a righteous indignation。
It has been so ever since America was a nation at all。Jefferson wrote it into the De-claration of Independence，and the Bill of Rights incorporated in the Constitution is based on it。These formal phrases of the public documents of a new nation were impor-tant just because they reflected a way of life that was taking shape in the daily living of men and women on this continent，a way of life that was strange to Europeans。One of the great documents of international reporting is the volume a young Frenchman，Alexis de Tocqueville，wrote on this subject of equality after he had visited the United States in the early eighteen-thirties。He was an intelligent and sympathetic observer who was able to see much good in this alien world of America。For it was alien。The young de Toc-queville had been bred in the aristocratic society of France which within the memory of still active and influential men had first been jolted and shocked by the French Revolu-tion and then by the new and drastic laws of Napoleon。He was generous in his appreci-ation of a strange new order of life in America but he saw it through the eyes of a French aristocrat and his book was a report to the Old World on things to come。The United States，he believed，was an advance post of developments which would take place，though with differences，in Europe also。
He reported therefore at length on this new world。Here people really considered themselves the equals of others。Their social intercourse was on a new and easy footing。They fell into conversation as man to man。Americans did not care about the little atten-tions of a hierarchal etiquette；they did not demand them as their due nor offer them to others。They liked to say they owed nothing to any man。There was no family here in the old aristocratic or Roman sense，and the social hierarchy which had dominated the Old World was gone。These Americans trusted equality as they trusted nothing else；even liberty，he said，they often in practice let fly out of the window while they looked the other way。But they lived equality。
It is invigorating for Americans to see their forebears through the eyes of this stran-ger，writing about our way of life more than a century ago。There have been many chan-ges in our country but the main outlines have not altered。We recognize，as we read，that America in 1830 was already America as we know it。There have been，and there still are，those in this country who，like Alexander Hamilton in Jefferson's day，are in favor of a more aristocratic ordering of society。But even the Hamiltons recognize that our way of life in this country is not aristocratic。
When we stated to Japan therefore just before Pearl Harbor the high moral bases on which the United States based her policy in the Pacific we were voicing our most trusted principles。Every step in the direction in which we pointed would according to our convic-tions improve a still imperfect world。The Japanese，too，when they put their trust in“proper station”were turning to the rule of life which had been ingrained in them by their own social experience。Inequality has been for centuries the rule of their organized life at just those points where it is most predictable and most accepted。Behavior that recognizes hierarchy is as natural to them as breathing。It is not，however，a simple Occidental au-thoritarianism。Both those who exercise control and those who are under others'control act in conformity to a tradition which is unlike our own，and now that the Japanese have ac-cepted the high hierarchal place of American authority in their country it is even more necessary for us to get the clearest possible idea of their conventions。Only so can we pic-ture to ourselves the way in which they are likely to act in their present situation。
Japan for all its recent Westernization is still an aristocratic society。Every greet-ing，every contact must indicate the kind and degree of social distance between men。Every time a man says to another“Eat”or“Sit down”he uses different words if he is addressing someone familiarly or is speaking to an inferior or to a superior。There is a different“you”that must be used in each case and the verbs have different stems。The Japanese have，in other words，what is called a“respect language，”as many other peo-ples do in the Pacific，and they accompany it with proper bows and kneelings。All such behavior is governed by meticulous rules and conventions；it is not merely necessary to know to whom one bows but it is necessary to know how much one bows。A bow that is right and proper to one host would be resented as an insult by another who stood in a slightly different relationship to the bower。And bows range all the way from kneeling with forehead lowered to the hands placed flat upon the floor，to the mere inclination of head and shoulders。One must learn，and learn early，how to suit the obeisance to each particular case。
It is not merely class differences which must be constantly recognized by appropri-ate behavior，though these are important。Sex and age，family ties and previous dealings between two persons all enter into the necessary calculations。Even between the same two persons different degrees of respect will be called for on different occasions：a civil-ian may be on familiar terms with another and not bow to him at all，but when he wears a military uniform his friend in civilian clothes bows to him。Observance of hierarchy is an art which requires the balancing of innumerable factors，some of which in any parti-cular case may cancel each other out and some of which may be additive。
There are of course persons between whom there is relatively little ceremony。In the United States these people are one's own family circle。We shed even the slight formalities of our etiquette when we come home to the bosom of our family。In Japan it is precisely in the family where respect rules are learned and meticulously observed。While the mother still carries the baby strapped to her back she will push his head down with her hand，and his first lessons as a toddler are to observe respect behavior to his father or older brother。The wife bows to her husband，the child bows to his father，younger brothers bow to elder brothers，the sister bows to all her brothers of whatever age。It is no empty gesture。It means that the one who bows acknowledges the right of the other to have his way in things he might well prefer to manage himself，and the one who receives the bow acknowledges in his turn certain responsibilities incumbent upon his station。Hierarchy based on sex and generation and primogeniture are part and parcel of family life。
Filial piety is，of course，a high ethical law which Japan shares with China，and Chinese formulations of it were early adopted in Japan along with Chinese Buddhism，Confucian ethics and secular Chinese culture in the sixth and seventh centuries A。D。The character of filial piety，however，was inevitably modified to suit the different struc-ture of the family in Japan。In China，even today，one owes loyalty to one's vast extend-ed clan。It may number tens of thousands of people over whom it has jurisdiction and from whom it receives support。Conditions differ in different parts of that vast country but in large parts of China all people in any village are members of the same clan。A-mong all of China's 450000000 inhabitants there are only 470 surnames and all people with the same surname count themselves in some degree clan-brothers。Over a whole ar-ea all people may be exclusively of one clan and，in addition，families living in far-a-way cities are their clan fellows。In populous areas like Kwangtung all the clan members unite in keeping up great clan-halls and on stated days they venerate as many as a thou-sand ancestral tablets of dead clan members stemming from a common forebear。Each clan owns property，lands and temples and has clan funds which are used to pay for the education of any promising clan son。It keeps track for the education of any promising clan son。It keeps track of dispersed members and publishes elaborate genealogies which are brought up to date every decade or so to show the names of those who have a right to share in its privileges。It has ancestral laws which might even forbid them to surrender family criminals to the State if the clan was not in agreement with the authorities。In Im-perial times these great communities of semi-autonomous clans were governed in the name of the larger State as casually as possible by easygoing mandarinates headed by ro-tating State appointees who were foreigners in the area。
All this was different in Japan。Until the middle of the nineteenth century only no-ble families and warrior families were allowed to use surnames。Surnames were funda-mental in the Chinese clan system and without these，or some equivalent，clan organiza-tion cannot develop。One of these equivalents in some tribes is keeping a genealogy。But in Japan only the upper classes kept genealogies and even in these they kept the record，as Daughters of the American Revolution do in the United States，backward in time from the present living person，not downward in time to include every contemporary who stemmed from an original ancestor。It is a very different matter。Besides，Japan was a feudal country。Loyalty was due，not to a great group of relatives，but to a feudal lord。He was resident overlord，and the contrast with the temporary bureaucratic mandarins of China，who were always strangers in their districts，could not have been greater。What was important in Japan was that one was of the fief of Satsuma or the fief of Hizen。A man's ties were to his fief。
Another way of institutionalizing clans is through the worship of remote ancestors or of clan gods at shrines or holy places。This would have been possible for the Japanese“common people”even without surnames and genealogies。But in Japan there is no cult of veneration of remote ancestors and at the shrines where“common people”worship all villagers join together without having to prove their common ancestry。They are called the“children”of their shrine-god，but they are“children”because they live in his ter-ritory。Such village worshipers are of course related to each other as villagers in any part of the world are after generations of fixed residence but they are not a tight clan group descended from a common ancestor。
The reverence due to ancestors is paid at a quite different shrine in the family living room where only six or seven recent dead are honored。Among all classes in Japan obei-sance is done daily before this shrine and food set out for parents and grandparents and close relatives remembered in the flesh，who are represented in the shrine by little mini-ature gravestones。Even in the cemetery the markers on the graves of great-grandparents are no longer relettered and the identity even of the third ancestral generation sinks rap-idly into oblivion。Family ties in Japan are whittled down almost to Occidental propor-tions and the French family is perhaps the nearest equivalent。
“Filial piety”in Japan，therefore，is a matter within a limited face-to-face family。It means taking one's proper station according to generation，sex，and age within a group which includes hardly more than one's father and father's father，their brothers and their descendants。Even in important houses，where larger groups may be included，the fami-ly splits up into separate lines and younger sons establish branch families。Within this narrow face-to-face group the rules that regulate“proper station”are meticulous。There is strict subservience to elders until they elect to go into formal retirement（inkyo）。Even today a father of grown sons，if his own father has not retired，puts through no transac-tion without having it approved by the old grandfather。Parents make and break their children's marriages even when the children are thirty and forty years old。The father as male head of the household is served first at meals，goes first to the family bath，and re-ceives with a nod the deep bows of his family。There is a popular riddle in Japan which might be translated into our conundrum form：“Why is a son who wants to offer advice to his parents like a Buddhist priest who wants to have hair on the top of his head？”（Buddhist priests had a tonsure。）The answer is，“However much he wants to do it，he can't。”
proper station means not only differences of generation but differences of age。When the Japanese want to express utter confusion，they say that something is“neither elder brother nor younger brother。”It is like our saying that something is neither fish nor fowl，for to the Japanese a man should keep his character as elder brother as drasti-cally as a fish should stay in water。The eldest son is the heir。Travelers speak of“that air of responsibility which the eldest son so early acquires in Japan。”The eldest son shares to a high degree in the prerogatives of the father。In the old days his younger brother would have been inevitably dependent upon him in time；nowadays，especially in towns and villages，it is he who will stay at home in the old rut while his younger brothers will perhaps press forward and get more education and a better income。But old habits of hierarchy are strong。
Even in political commentary today the traditional prerogatives of elder brothers are vividly stated in discussions of Greater East Asia policy。In the spring of 1942 a Lieuten-ant Colonel，speaking for the War Office，said on the subject of the Co-prosperity Sphere：“Japan is their elder brother and they are Japan's younger brothers。This fact must be brought home to the inhabitants of the occupied territories。Too much considera-tion shown for the inhabitants might engender in their minds the tendency to presume on Japan's kindness with pernicious effects on Japanese rule。”The elder brother，in other words，decides what is good for his younger brother and should not show“too much con-sideration”in enforcing it。
Whatever one's age，one's position in the hierarchy depends on whether one is male or female。The Japanese woman walks behind her husband and has a lower status。Even women who on occasions when they wear American clothes walk alongside and precede him through a door，again fall to the rear when they have donned their kimonos。The Japanese daughter of the family must get along as best she can while the presents，the attentions，and the money for education go to her brothers。Even when higher schools were established for young women the prescribed courses were heavily loaded with in-struction in etiquette and bodily movement。Serious intellectual training was not on a par with boys'，and one principal of such a school，advocating for his upper middle class students some instruction in European languages，based his recommendation on the de-sirability of their being able to put their husband's books back in the bookcase right side up after they had dusted them。