Admitting that in the present situation of the world history the problems of youth have become an important problem in all social systems and countries, in this article I am discussing how we should treat the problems on the basis of the past sociological researches. When we approach the problems I think the following three points necessary : (1) to take them in relation to essential aspects of social change and to make clear the quality of the change, (2) to take what the problems involue as the phenomenal form of the relations of confrontation and tension between other generations and within the same generation, and (3) to grasp the problems in relation to the buckgrounds of the times facing the world-historical change. The problems of youth in the real situation, however, are so complex and diverse that it is difficult to take them simply and uniformly. Especially in Japan rapid changes have been taken place for recent ten or more years, so it is not always possible to clarify the phenomena that have come out as the problems of youth wholly. Therefore I think it necessary to take the problems, which have been taken as the problems of university students or universities, by putting more emphasis on young laborers transfered to factories or industrial sections in a large scale and the youth in rural villages forced to flow out of their villages in the development of industrialization. I want to seize the problems of youth, and the changes of Japanese society through economic and technological changes, and what these changes have brought. By doing this we should clarify the rules and forms of individuals' behavioral patterns and consciousness, and there exists the method of sociological researches not of speculative and philosophical ones. International comparison of the problems is needed, but when it is practiced we should pay attention to discriminating between the specularity of each society and the general tendency.
I have the following three aims in this thesis. They are (1) to approach the political consciousness of youth from the view point of taking the large scale non-voting of youth as a typical phenomenan ; (2) to make clear the relationship between the non-voting and the political consciousness ; and (3) to reexamine the situation of the political consciousness of youth suggested by the large scale non-voting by expanding the object from elections to political systems in general. The cause of the large scale non-voting is first of all the migration of the youth population toward urban areas which is resulted from the high-rate economic growth. Secondly we can find it in their attitude to the present condition of party politics, such as the phenomenon of indifference to political parties. This attitude contains the criticism for the present situation of politics, and therefore it is dangerous to take it simply as political apathy. To explain this analytically, interest in politics is distinguished from political consciousness, and we can say that those who abstain from voting have little interest in elections but we cannot always say that they have little interest in politics. Actually in such societies as Japan where conformity is very strong, various social regulations on voting urge those who are indifferent to politics to vote. But we cannot neglect the tendency that not only in cities but in countries the criticism to conformity in voting is becoming strong among youth and that this criticism is expressed as non-voting. The difficulty of measuring the level of political consciousness from interest in politics is also known from the fact that elections are only one element of political system. As political consciousness is the total of psychological orientation to each element and the whole of political system, it is necessary to reexamine the political distrust and criticism of youth, which can be found in the large scale non-voting, in relation with the total of this consciousness. By this reexamination we can make clear the problem of continuity or discontinuity between youth and other generations on the level of political consciousness.
Kagawa prefecture has 48 outcast communities (buraku), some of which are situated in small islands like Shozu island. All of those buraku are densely populated, because of the relatively big size of population and household in a small-sized area, and left to be below standard in every aspect of living, from housing, to other living environments, working conditions and education. In Shozu island which has no important local industries except soy browing industry, many male-adults have been at work mainly in Osaka, Kobe and their surrounding areas and sometimes moved out there with their family, even before the W.W. II. Under the recent population trend of Kagawa prefecture which has been rapidly loosing polulation, Uchinomi-cho (town), situated in an eastern part of the island, has been also loosing about 15% of its population, especially its male population, for the last 10 years. But two buraku, Kusakabe-minami and Tachibana, with which I will deal in the study, have grown in population and household. It can be said a peculiar phenomenon that only buraku have been overpopulated under the general trend of underpopulation in Kagawa prefecture as a whole. For example, in a usual community contiguous to Tachibana buraku, many of those who sojourned in other industrial areas for work got settled in those places and the number of family in the village has been changed little for the last 80 years ; from 129 houses at the end of 21 year of the Meiji Era to 126 households at the time of our research. On the other hand, in the two buraku, the number of family has increased five times ; from 22 houses at the end of 21 year of the Meiji Era to 111 households at the time of our research. This shows the situation in which many of the collateral families, which have been produced from the frequent segmentation of original households, have been obliged to stay in buraku, as they were not able “to move out as a whole household” (“kyoka-rison” in Japanese). Because of this situation, the economic basis of buraku, already weakened by the fact mentioned above, has been demolished and the low standard of living has been lowered further. The employment pattern of buraku residents shows temporal and unstable working conditions, compared with that of usual community residents. The main jobs for male-adults of buraku are constructive works in Kusakabe-minami and fishing works as well as sailors' of small means of conveyance in Tachibana. On the other hand, in usual surrounding communities, many male-adults work as small independent fishermen and as seamen of ocean routes. There is also a big difference in working days and income between buraku and usual communities. Now I will briefly descrive the research strategies of our field work which has been done in two outcast communities in Uchinomi-cho and Tachibana usual community contiguous to them. Firstly, I would like to clarify what kind of distortion the discrimination against buraku has given to the employment structure and population trend of buraku in an island. Secondly, I would like to point out some causes which prevent outcast community members of an isolated from free employment and working in urban industrial communities. Generally speaking of the recent socioeconomic situation in Japan, urban industrial communities are keenly lacking in labor force on the one hand and rural communities are forced to be underpopulated, because many members sojourn in urban areas for work and move out from the village as a whole household on the other hand.
The purpose of this article is to analyze a migration pattern within Japan with census data (1950) and other survey data. The main working hypothesis is E.G. Ravenstein's seven “Laws of Migration” (1885/1889). Finally, I found a “current of migration” from the rural area to the great centers of commerce and industry in the distance (Centers of absorption of migrants) just as Ravenstein pointed out on Britain in nineteeth century. This current of migration can be represented numerically that migrants ennumerated in a certain center of absorption will grow less with the distance proportionately to the native population which furnishes them. To say more precisely, the current of migration consists of three currents of migration ; (1a) Rural area-Centers of absorption, (1b) Rural area-Contiguous local towns (staying several months or several years) -Centers of absorption, and, (2) Rural area-Contiguous local towns ; Local towns-Centers of absorption (Migrants are exchanged in the local towns). It is usually said that the proportion of (1a) is large in Japan in compare with other countries. But, from my analysis, it is not true. One important question is whether this current of migration is generated mainly by the push power of the rural area or by the pull power of the centers of absorption. While Ravenstein explained on nineteenth century Britain by the pull power, we must explain on modern Japan by the push power.
It has long been assumed to be natural that population moves from rural to urban area, not from urban to rural area. But recently, some Japanese urbanologists pointed out the existence of so called “U-turn population movement”. According to them, a number of population is now overflowing from “Japanese Megalopolis” to local cities. As is shown on Tab. 1, the amount of population moving from Tohoku (non-metropolitan) district to three metropolitan areas is decreasing, and, on the contrary, the amount of inhabitants returning back to Tohoku district is remarkably increasing. On the analysis of this table, Mr. Kuroda insisted on the existence of “U-turn” population movement. But there are even those who are not willing to agree with Kuroda's thesis. Mr. Ono is among those who stand against Mr. Kuroda. Ono, intending to show that the “U-turn” is not so remarkable a social phenomenon, prepared Tab. 2. This table includes three items concerning population movements between several metropolitan areas, one item of population movement within a metropolitan area, and one item of population movement from metropolis to non-metropolitan areas. Ono culculated χ2, and concluded that it is not reasonable to assume “Population U-turn” was so remarkable a movement. But, for all the methodological conscienceness of Ono. It seems to me he missed on his model-building. First of all, what he accounted was chiefly the amount of population moving within or between metropolitan areas, and not the amout of inhabiants who were moving between metropolitan and non-metropolitan areas. Secondly, what he compared with the state of 1968 was the state of 1965. But it must be impossible for any social phenomenon to show so remarkable a change within three years. I re-culculated χ2, modifying Ono's model and using Kuroda's data. Then, following numbers of χ2 could be found out. Between metropolitan areas and Tohoku 26.404 Between metropolitan areas and Kyushu 38.817 Between metropolitan areas and Hokuriku 2.239 Between metropolitan areas and Shikoku 10.388 Between metropolitan areas and Chugoku 20.139 Between metropolitan areas and To-san 2.300