From the Tideline Newsletter
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
This newsletter is a weekly report from Takahiro Mitsui, delivered every Wednesday (JST) from his ongoing research of Japan. It brings you a perspective and a point of view you will not find elsewhere, as soon as they take shape.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Vol.7
Aug 26, 2026
■□■□■□■□■□■□■□■□■□■□■□■□■□■□■□■□
1｜LIVING QUESTIONS
2｜JAPANESE THOUGHT
■□■□■□■□■□■□■□■□■□■□■□■□■□■□■□■□
::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
1｜ LIVING QUESTIONS
::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
To keep asking in a world with no answers. Takahiro Mitsui has made asking his way of life, crossing at speed between the turbulence of the outer world and the sharpening reflection of the inner. Each week begins here, with what he is seeing now and how he sees it.
…………………………………………………………………………………………………
The subject. I take it to be the theme that most deserves sustained and serious argument, and precisely because the problem is taken so lightly it is almost never doubted. Yet the fight over this one and only seat is still being waged inside the West, which has a subject to fight over. That is a heavy fact and I am not willing to walk past it.
The world as it actually is looks nothing like that. Japanese has no subject. At a glance the presence or absence of one seems far too small a thing to change anything. In practice literally everything is turned upside down. Whether a language carries a subject is the plainest proof available that two worlds are not the same world.
The question of this absolute seat can now be raised in the Western world under almost any heading. The place where I think the difference has surfaced most sharply is AI.
Say AI and most people assume the argument has already been had, and they are tired of a debate that seems to have run well past its usefulness. They are wrong. AI as it appears to someone whose language has a subject and AI as it appears to someone whose language has none are different to a degree that makes mutual understanding impossible. That is the decisive fact. The debate advances by ignoring it and treating it as though it had never been there, on the assumption that one side’s terms are everyone’s terms. We have to think seriously about what happens then. The risk is fatal, and unfortunately it is not understood at all.
Consider the shape of the typical Western argument. It can proceed only as a choice between the human and AI, and this has puzzled me for a long time. The human in that formulation is a creature of Western history and the Western cultural range. Seen from the world as a whole it is shared inside the heads of an extremely limited group, and one step outside that group a vast territory opens where the sharing does not hold. The same is true of AI. An argument about the human or AI conducted entirely within the West stands on its own historical and cultural ground. It is not general and it is not universal. That is the reality.
A young friend from London has been traveling in Japan and we met several times. He told me that when he traveled around China he was startled to find that Western manners did not work at all. I was the one who was startled.
What is obvious is no longer registered as obvious. The addiction to the universal has spread that far and gone that deep. Why should people in East Asia be expected to conduct themselves by Western manners in the first place? The same pattern runs everywhere and through everything, and I expect it to break out on many fronts as a genuinely difficult problem in the years ahead.
And AI has begun to raise this problem ahead of everything else.
English speakers are held by the structure of their language to one subject and one only. Subjects cannot be multiplied or made to coexist inside a single grammar. So under the name of diversity they do not recognize the other as a subject with a legitimacy of its own. They recognize it instead as something to be protected. That is the practice of the Western cultural sphere, and as long as it stays inside the West it deserves respect. Japanese carries no such restriction in its structure. The problem of the subject does not arise, and speakers can wield it freely as place and situation require.
The problem of the one absolute seat is particular to the West, and it does not exist in Japan. The argument over the human or AI has no native ground here. When Japanese intellectuals reproduce it now, they are performing something else. A certain set of people with study experience in America and elsewhere act as though Japanese had a subject, out of admiration for the West. There is nothing inside it. They look Japanese and they do not know Japanese.
The deepest and longest influence on Japan has without question come from China. China’s national strategy built on AI has nothing in common with the American AI strategy of the English-speaking world. The two are severed so completely that arguing about them inside a shared definition of the human or of AI is not even possible. Western argument conflates them anyway and is confused as a result. Worse, the Western debate about AI goes on ignoring the rupture. That is where the problem should be located now.
Put plainly, the Western argument over American and Chinese AI is extremely simple when seen from Japan, which has been shaped deeply by both countries and stands outside both. For a while I could not understand why so much confusion was necessary. I knew the cause lay in the subject. What I could not get hold of was how it was actually operating. That has recently become clear.
In fact China has been scattering frontier AI one after another as open weights, before any American AI company has managed to go public. The releases follow national strategy, and they have brilliantly blocked the American technology giants from installing themselves as the subject. The run of postponed IPOs by American AI companies shows the strategy is working.
A language with a subject cannot accommodate two of them. So the United States has no option but to read China as a threat moving to take the seat. But China has made a thoroughgoing tactic of defeating the opponent without firing a single missile. Set the two against the span of civilizational history and the gap is enormous. America is shallow in civilizational years and no match for the wisdom of a China that has come through civilizational crisis many times over.
The teaser video released a month ago for the open-weights Kimi K3 was enough on its own to sense that China has already absorbed thought into AI, and where it is heading.
Inscribed in the video was a passage from Chapter 42 of the Laozi, the Daodejing.
[道生一、一生二、二生三、三生萬物。]
There is no struggle over the subject anywhere in that. And while frontier open weights keep dropping out of China one after another, the 2026 World Humanoid Robot Games held this week were the moment that future became visible. China has already broken the American business model of selling AI at a high price in perpetuity.
To reduce the opponent to scorched earth without firing a single missile. What came into my head was the teaching of Sun Tzu from two and a half thousand years ago, to win without fighting.
It may be that this event will be recorded by people far in the future as the moment when the hegemony of the English-speaking world was exposed before the world as no longer able to hold, having absolutized the subject too far. That is the thought this week has left me with.
Each of us should create a serious occasion to ask again what a subject is.
::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
2｜JAPANESE THOUGHT
::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
Much of what the world says about Japan misses its essence. This section ranges across Japanese history, culture, myth, belief, folklore, and philosophy to offer one seed of its wisdom.
…………………………………………………………………………………………………