How the GHQ Occupation Reshaped Japan’s Culture and Traditions

—

What GHQ “Sealed” in Japan: The Truth Behind How Occupation Policy Changed Tradition and Culture

Post-Occupation Japanese Culture — Transformation in the Name of Democratization and Demilitarization

Following World War II, Japan was placed under the control of the Supreme Commander for the Allied Powers (SCAP/GHQ), an occupation that lasted for seven years, from September 2, 1945, to April 28, 1952.
The primary objectives of this occupation were the “demilitarization” and “democratization” of Japan.
These goals were intended to fundamentally transform Japanese society to ensure that the nation would never again pose a threat to the international community.
GHQ believed that prewar Japan’s aggression was driven by “militarism” and “ultranationalism” and thus decided to completely dismantle these ideological foundations.

Table of Contents

This policy was not limited to institutional reforms in politics, the economy, and education; it also profoundly influenced the values, culture, and traditions that had been cultivated by the Japanese people for many years.
GHQ considered some traditional cultural practices, such as kendo, kabuki, and Japanese mythology, to be “bellicose” or “nationalistic.”
They enacted measures that included banning activities, disbanding organizations, and even burning related books.
At the same time, GHQ promoted new ideals of individual liberation and democratization, leading to the influx of American lifestyles and popular culture into Japan.

GHQ’s reforms have a “light” side, playing a crucial role in building the foundation of modern Japanese society.
The enactment of a new constitution and the promotion of values like gender equality and respect for human rights laid the groundwork for postwar Japan’s peace and prosperity. However, the occupation also has a “dark” side, where Japanese traditions and values were unilaterally suppressed, and its impact continues to this day.
This “dark” side illustrates the multifaceted nature of the occupation policies.
This report analyzes the cultural and traditional matters that GHQ “sealed” in Japan, detailing the historical context behind each and the complex effects they have had on modern society.

Below is a list of the main reform directives issued by GHQ and the subjects they targeted.
These directives serve as the starting point for the themes detailed in this report.

No.	Directive / Law	Date Issued	Summary of Action	Reason Stated by GHQ
1	SCAPIN-548 – Educational Reform	Oct 22, 1945	Removal of militaristic subjects from schools, including martial arts such as kendo, judo, kyudo, and naginata.	Martial arts were seen as fostering militarism and ultra-nationalism.
2	SCAPIN-775 – Suspension of Moral, History, and Geography Classes	Mar 31, 1946	Halted teaching of moral education (Shūshin), Japanese history, and geography until textbooks could be revised to remove militaristic content.	To eliminate emperor-worship, loyalty cults, and glorification of war.
3	SCAPIN-448 – Shinto Directive	Dec 15, 1945	Abolished State Shinto as a government institution; banned school shrine visits and state-sponsored Shinto ceremonies.	Enforce separation of religion and state; dismantle emperor-worship ideology.
4	SCAPIN-16 – Control of News, Publications, and Broadcasting	Sep 10, 1945	Prohibited broadcasting of militaristic songs, including military marches.	Prevent revival of wartime propaganda and nationalist sentiment.
5	SCAPIN-209 – Surrender of Military Items	Oct 22, 1945	Required surrender of all military uniforms, decorations, and weapons not registered as cultural property.	Prevent rearmament and remove visible symbols of the military.
6	National Holidays Law Revision	1948	Abolished imperial-related holidays such as Kigensetsu (National Foundation Day), Meijisetsu (Emperor Meiji’s Birthday), and Tenchōsetsu (Emperor’s Birthday).	Remove ties between public holidays, State Shinto, and the Emperor system.
7	Verbal Order to Sumo Association	Late 1945	Ordered removal of military flags, anthems, and propaganda from sumo tournaments.	Preserve cultural heritage while removing militaristic overtones.

The Control of Speech and Expression — The Truth Sealed by the Press Code

GHQ’s occupation policy aimed not just to disarm the military but to fundamentally transform the thoughts and consciousness of the Japanese people.
One of the most powerful tools for achieving this was “Press Code” censorship.
On September 19, 1945, GHQ issued SCAPIN-33, the “Press Code for Japan,” which initiated censorship of all information media, including newspapers, books, broadcasts, films, theater, rakugo (comic storytelling), and kamishibai (paper storytelling).

Although this censorship system was explained as a means to democratize Japan, it severely violated the freedom of speech and the press.
The Civil Censorship Detachment (CCD), a subordinate organization of GHQ, strictly enforced censorship based on ten criteria, with the following subjects being particularly tightly regulated:

Criticism of GHQ or Allied Forces
Any words or actions that hindered occupation policy were completely forbidden.
Reporting on Atomic Bomb Casualties
The devastating conditions in Hiroshima and Nagasaki were considered an inconvenient truth by GHQ, and reporting on them was strictly limited.
Affirmation of the Divinity of the Emperor
For GHQ, which sought to dismantle the emperor system as the spiritual backbone of the war effort, this was one of the most important prohibitions.
Misconduct by Allied Soldiers
Crimes such as assault, rape, and looting were forbidden from being reported to avoid damaging the image of the Allied forces.
Content Affirming Japan’s War Aims
Reporting was required to portray the Pacific War as a “war of aggression,” and any statements asserting Japan’s justification were deleted.
Mentioning Censorship Itself
The most ingenious aspect of this censorship was that it also forbade reporting on the fact that censorship was taking place.

The reality of this censorship is documented in materials preserved in the Gordon W. Prange Collection at the University of Maryland.
For instance, an article in the Yūkan Hiroshima (Hiroshima Evening Paper) on August 21, 1946, concerning the prohibition of a kabuki performance is considered one of the oldest sources that mentions censorship.
An article in the Chugoku Shimbun on September 8, 1946, that mentioned “GHQ’s Civil Information and Education Section (CIE) is carrying out censorship of newspapers, films, and broadcasts” was marked “unacceptable” and deleted.
Furthermore, a sentence from a record company stating, “The release has been postponed due to censorship,” was also deleted. This shows that GHQ was thorough in its attempts to eliminate the word “censorship” itself, regardless of the article’s content.

This direct control of speech by GHQ left a lasting impact on postwar Japan’s media landscape.
The censorship that began as a temporary measure during the occupation persisted as a “GHQ ideological space.”
It instilled a culture of self-censorship among journalists and intellectuals – a psychological pressure to feel that it was “safer not to touch certain topics”.
This cultural and psychological legacy of “freedom not to speak,” such as the avoidance of reporting on the atomic bomb and taboos surrounding the emperor system, is deeply rooted in modern Japanese media and education.
As such, GHQ’s policies did not just alter visible institutions; they also had a complex and enduring influence on shaping people’s consciousness and behavior.

The Separation of State and Religion — The Shock of the State Shinto Directive and GHQ’s Misunderstanding

GHQ focused on State Shinto as one of the root causes of Japan’s militaristic and ultranationalistic ideology.
To dismantle it, on December 15, 1945, GHQ issued the “Shinto Directive” (SCAPIN-448) to the Japanese government.
Formally titled “Abolition of Governmental Sponsorship, Support, Perpetuation, Control, and Dissemination of State Shinto,” the directive was positioned as a measure to promote freedom of religion as outlined in the Potsdam Declaration.

The main points of the Shinto Directive were as follows:

Rejection of State Shinto
It explicitly rejected the designation of Shinto as the state religion and guaranteed freedom of religion.
Prohibition of Public Support
All public support and financial aid for shrines from public institutions were prohibited.
Prohibition of Militaristic Terminology
The use of militaristic or ultranationalistic terms like “Dai Tō-A Sensō” (Greater East Asia War) and “Hakkō Ichiu” (eight corners of the world under one roof) in official documents was also forbidden.

GHQ believed that State Shinto served as the spiritual foundation of militarism and was used to wage war.
General MacArthur regarded this directive as one of the most important aspects of the occupation policy.
However, this policy was based on a fundamental misunderstanding of Japanese religion by GHQ.

The draft of the directive is said to have incorporated the views of D.C. Holtom, a scholar of religion who had lived in Japan for a long time.
However, these views have been criticized as “extremely narrow and full of problems”.
GHQ had mistakenly equated “State Shinto” with “Jinja Shintō” (Shrine Shinto), the faith of the general populace.
They mistakenly believed that shrines were used to preach militaristic ideas, similar to how an American pastor might deliver a fervent sermon in a church.
The fact that the term “State Shinto” itself was rarely used before the war and only became common after GHQ translated “State Shinto” after the war attests to the depth of this misunderstanding.

GHQ’s religious policy, which was implemented based on the views of a specific foreigner without a deep understanding of Japan’s religious culture, left unintended long-term issues.
As a result of the strict separation of church and state, shrines lost public support and were forced to transition into “religious corporations” that had to be self-sufficient.
This fundamentally changed the financial basis and significance of shrines, an outcome that went beyond GHQ’s original intentions.
While this policy laid the foundation for postwar Japan’s principle of “separation of church and state,” it continues to fuel debates today, such as whether shrines should receive public support as cultural heritage sites.
Thus, the issues born from GHQ’s misunderstanding continue to be debated in Japanese society long after the occupation ended.

The Redefinition of Martial Arts and Kabuki — The Transformation of Traditional Cultures Labeled “Bellicose”

To prevent the resurgence of Japanese militaristic thought, GHQ’s occupation policy deemed some traditional cultural practices, such as martial arts and kabuki, as “bellicose” or “nationalistic,” and ordered them to cease activities or be disbanded.
In particular, the Dai Nippon Butoku Kai (Greater Japan Martial Virtue Society), which had been under military control during the war, was dissolved in 1946, and martial arts classes and extracurricular activities in schools were banned.
However, these measures did not completely eliminate Japanese traditional culture; rather, they served as an opportunity for these practices to be “redefined” to fit GHQ’s standards.

The revival of martial arts began in earnest after the occupation ended with the signing of the Treaty of San Francisco in 1952, when Japan regained its sovereignty.
However, the condition for their return was that they be revived as “democratic sports”.
This process of “sportification” unfolded differently for each martial art.

Judo and Kyudo
Judo had been promoted overseas even before the war, and Allied soldiers had trained at the Kodokan.
This made its adaptation to a “democratic sport” relatively smooth.
As a result, judo was permitted to return to school physical education in 1950, and kyudo was permitted the following year, in 1951.
The fact that kyudo had less of a militaristic combat flavor than kendo was also a factor in its early revival.
Kendo
Kendo received the harshest judgment for revival because it was seen as having “taught an effective way to handle a sword as a weapon”.
As a result, kendo was forced to relaunch as “shinai (bamboo sword) competition.”
This emphasized its sport-like nature by using a different kind of bamboo sword, one that was finely split and wrapped in cloth or leather, and by having participants wear shirts and pants instead of traditional armor.
In this form, kendo was revived in 1952, and its return to schools at the high school level and above was realized in 1953.

GHQ’s prohibition and redefinition of martial arts were not just temporary regulations; they spurred a qualitative shift from traditional Japanese “bujutsu” (martial techniques) to modern “sports.”
Under GHQ’s guidance, martial arts were reconstructed as “combative sports,” with a strong emphasis on rule-based competition.
This redefinition fundamentally changed the techniques, spirituality, and social role of martial arts, transforming them into the “sports” that are popular in modern school education and international competitions.
The fact that the martial arts, once deemed “bellicose” during the occupation, internalized GHQ’s standards and live on under a new interpretation symbolizes the complex path that postwar Japanese culture has taken.

Reforms That Shook the Foundations of Social Structure — The Abolition of the Peerage and Ie Systems

GHQ’s occupation policy delved deeply into not only Japan’s culture and traditions but also the very structure of its social hierarchy.
The abolition of the Peerage System – the pinnacle of the prewar class system – and the Ie System – the foundation of Japanese life – were the most significant reforms symbolizing the democratization of Japanese society.

The Peerage System, established during the Meiji era, was a hierarchy of five ranks: prince, marquis, count, viscount, and baron.
It was positioned as the “shield of the Imperial Household.”
However, as part of GHQ’s democratization policies, this system was slated for abolition.
GHQ made the “correction of inequality” a key goal of democratization, which aligned with its aim of creating an equal and fair society.
With the enforcement of Article 14, Paragraph 2 of the Constitution of Japan on May 3, 1947, which states, “The peerage and other aristocratic systems shall not be recognized,” the Peerage System was completely eliminated.

The abolition of the Peerage System meant more than just the end of social ranks; it dramatically changed the lives of former peers. With the system’s dissolution, they lost their privileged status and the vast wealth that supported their lifestyles.
It has been reported that many former peers were forced to live a harsh, “hellish” existence, engaging in unfamiliar farm work or selling off their villas and land.
This is a vivid testimony to how abstract institutional reforms can have a profound impact on individual lives.

The dismantling of the Ie System was carried out in parallel with the abolition of the Peerage System.
From the perspective of improving the status of women and respecting human rights, GHQ abolished the ie system under the old Civil Code, which gave absolute power to the family head, and enacted a new Civil Code based on individual respect and gender equality.
This reform prompted a major shift in the Japanese concept of family, as new values that emphasized individual rights and freedoms over family ties were promoted.

GHQ’s policies to improve the status of women were a significant element of postwar social change.
GHQ granted women the right to vote, abolished the system of licensed prostitution, and promoted the ideal of gender equality through the revised Civil Code.
It’s a little-known fact that this process involved close cooperation between Ethel Weed, a female official in GHQ’s Civil Information and Education Section (CIE), and Japanese female leaders such as Fusaichiyo Ichikawa and Shizue Kato.
While the higher echelons of GHQ did not have a detailed policy on women’s issues, this network sometimes pushed for policies beyond the intentions of the top brass, thereby supporting the reforms.
This suggests that GHQ’s reforms were not just top-down directives but also involved a certain degree of initiative and collaboration on the Japanese side.

GHQ’s social structural reforms destroyed the economic foundation and authority of the prewar ruling class and fundamentally overturned traditional family values and gender roles.
This led to the creation of a modern society based on individual dignity, transforming the very hierarchy and values of Japanese society from the ground up.

The Modern Legacy of GHQ Reforms — Their Light and Shadow, and Attempts at Re-evaluation

GHQ’s occupation policy ended with the restoration of sovereignty in 1952, and many of its directives lost their legal force.
However, the legacy of “light and shadow” from the reforms carried out during this period remains at the core of debates surrounding modern Japan’s identity and historical awareness.

GHQ’s reforms are widely praised for their “light” side, as they laid the foundation for modern Japan.
The enactment of the new constitution, gender equality, the strengthening of workers’ rights, and land reform were essential in forming the democratic foundation of today’s Japanese society.
The fact that GHQ also focused on protecting cultural properties and promoted the restoration and preservation of cultural heritage lost in the war shows an important aspect of the occupation: that its policies were not solely about the destruction of tradition.

On the other hand, GHQ’s reforms also have a “dark” side that continues to this day.
There are persistent criticisms that the rewriting of history textbooks and the War Guilt Information Program (WGIP) robbed the Japanese people of “pride” in their own history and instilled a self-deprecating historical view (the “masochistic view of history”) that “Japan was a bad country”.
Furthermore, as detailed in Chapter 1, the influence of the “Press Code” lingered in media and among intellectuals as a “freedom not to speak,” creating a climate where certain topics became taboo.

GHQ’s occupation policy did not simply close a historical chapter in 1952.
The values and historical perceptions formed during the occupation continued to be ingrained through education and media, and their influence extends to the present day.
This impact gave rise to movements to re-examine Japan’s own historical perspective, such as the “textbook lawsuits,” long after the occupation.
This suggests that GHQ’s legacy is not a “fixed past” but an ongoing “subject of debate.”

The culture and values that GHQ temporarily tried to “seal” did not just make a simple comeback.
Martial arts, Shinto, and historical perspectives were all redefined under a new interpretation, internalizing the criteria of “democratic” and “scientific” that GHQ had promoted.
For example, historian Saburō Ienaga attempted to “scientifically” redefine Japanese culture and history in the midst of debates about postwar historical awareness.
Through his book History of Japanese Culture, he sent a message to postwar Japanese people that it was “possible to revive past glorious traditions and contribute to the improvement of world culture”.
This was an important attempt by the Japanese people to reclaim their own identity, which had been lost during the occupation.

GHQ’s occupation policy had an immeasurable impact on Japanese tradition and culture.
It includes both the brilliant legacy of establishing democracy and the complex issue of a shaken cultural identity.
Delving deeply into the things that were “prohibited” or “abolished” during the occupation is essential not only for understanding past history but also for comprehending how the foundation of modern Japanese society was formed and what challenges it faces today.