them. Readers are thus in a position to see how a fi gure like Seno’o becomes increasingly radical in his critique of both nationalism and capitalism (until he is fi nally brought under the thumb of the state and forced to recant his political beliefs). They are in a position too to see that the more common intellectual trajectory is one like that of Itō Shōshin, who starts his career as a utopian progressive, comes to champion ultranationalism during the war years, and then reverses course to take up the cause of pacifi sm in the postwar period. One effect of seeing how consistently progressives failed to adequately understand and respond to contemporary political events might be a new appreciation on the part of the reader of the extent to which his or her own moral clarity is a result not of his or her unimpeachable character but rather of what philosopher Thomas Nagel has called moral luck: the luck of simply not having found himself or herself in a situation in which he or she is morally tested. At the same time, to the extent that it is possible to ask moral questions without moralizing, Against Harmony proves a useful starting point for assessing the present moment. Shields allows himself one such moral question, asking how the work of the fi gures he presents here might prove of “lasting value for anyone interested in reimagining not only Buddhist practice, but human fl ourishing in the twenty-fi rst century” (p. 257). But Against Harmony also illuminates the degree to which the boundary between populism and nativism proved to be porous and unstable in modern Japan, and the relative weakness of liberal progressivism in the face of such nativism. It might thus prompt us to ask some other, less sunny questions that I think will resonate with contemporary readers: in a time of mass movements and massive political upheaval, how can one hold onto a distinction between populism and nativism? Indeed, can a drift into nativism be prevented at all? In committing himself to a wide-ranging study, Shields has produced a book that is not only lively but timely.

中文翻译：

---

传说中的圣人：米卡·L·奥尔巴克创作的日本佛像

他们。因此，读者可以看到像 Seno'o 这样的人物如何在对民族主义和资本主义的批评中变得越来越激进（直到他最终受到国家的控制并被迫放弃他的政治信仰）。他们也可以看到，更常见的知识分子轨迹是像伊藤正信那样的，他以乌托邦式的进步主义者的身份开始了自己的职业生涯，在战争年代支持极端民族主义，然后反过来走上正轨事业。战后时期的和平主​​义。看到不断进步的人如何未能充分理解和回应当代政治事件的一种影响可能是读者对他或她自己的道德清晰度在多大程度上不是由于他或她无可指责的性格而是而不是哲学家托马斯·内格尔（Thomas Nagel）所说的道德运气：根本没有发现自己处于道德考验的境地的运气。同时，就可以在不道德化的情况下提出道德问题而言，《反和谐》证明是评估当下的有用起点。希尔兹提出了一个这样的道德问题，询问他在这里展示的数字的工作如何证明“对于任何有兴趣重新想象不仅佛教实践，但人类在二十一世纪蓬勃发展”（第 257 页）。但《反和谐》也阐明了民粹主义和本土主义之间的界限在现代日本被证明是多孔和不稳定的程度，以及自由进步主义在这种本土主义面前的相对弱点。因此，它可能会促使我们提出一些我认为会引起当代读者共鸣的其他一些不太阳光的问题：在群众运动和大规模政治动荡的时代，如何区分民粹主义和本土主义？确实，完全可以防止陷入本土主义吗？希尔兹致力于广泛的研究，出版了一本不仅生动而且及时的书。但《反和谐》也阐明了民粹主义和本土主义之间的界限在现代日本被证明是多孔和不稳定的程度，以及自由进步主义在这种本土主义面前的相对弱点。因此，它可能会促使我们提出一些我认为会引起当代读者共鸣的其他一些不太阳光的问题：在群众运动和大规模政治动荡的时代，如何区分民粹主义和本土主义？确实，完全可以防止陷入本土主义吗？希尔兹致力于广泛的研究，出版了一本不仅生动而且及时的书。但《反和谐》也阐明了民粹主义和本土主义之间的界限在现代日本被证明是多孔和不稳定的程度，以及自由进步主义在这种本土主义面前的相对弱点。因此，它可能会促使我们提出一些我认为会引起当代读者共鸣的其他一些不太阳光的问题：在群众运动和大规模政治动荡的时代，如何区分民粹主义和本土主义？确实，完全可以防止向本土主义的转变吗？希尔兹致力于广泛的研究，出版了一本不仅生动而且及时的书。我认为会引起当代读者共鸣的不那么阳光的问题：在群众运动和大规模政治动荡的时代，如何区分民粹主义和本土主义？确实，完全可以防止陷入本土主义吗？希尔兹致力于广泛的研究，出版了一本不仅生动而且及时的书。我认为会引起当代读者共鸣的不那么阳光的问题：在群众运动和大规模政治动荡的时代，如何区分民粹主义和本土主义？确实，完全可以防止陷入本土主义吗？希尔兹致力于广泛的研究，出版了一本不仅生动而且及时的书。