Myth, Protest and Struggle in Okinawa

58 Myth, protest and struggle in Okinawa
was changing in mainland Japan, and that Okinawa is lagging behind’ (Yara
1968: 27). Local principals and the Okinawa Guntō government Educational
Section jointly requested USCAR to permit Okinawan teachers’ travel to participate
in training programmes in the mainland (Yara 1968: 26–7). Yara and his
OTA colleagues thus came to be regarded as the main instigators of the reversion
movement on the education front. This allowed them to mobilize schoolchildren
and parents for their reversion campaign.
Workers
As the US military accelerated construction of their bases in Okinawa, local
unskilled workers started to organize political action. The construction companies,
about half of which were from mainland Japan, employed local labour and workers
from Amami Island, who migrated in search of jobs. Exploitation of local labour
was essential to the speedy construction of US military bases and the conditions
under which they worked were appalling. More than 250 workers at a time were
accommodated in big buildings, which were described as ‘pigsties’ (butagoya)by
the locals. The barracks were built directly on the ground without floorboards, and
had leaky roofs and no basic facilities such as toilets (Nagumo 1996: 30, Senaga
1959: 244). Workers were nevertheless charged for accommodation, food, and maid
services. 10 They received extremely low wages after these deductions and these
were often suspended arbitrarily. Indeed, their pay was frequently less than what
was needed to sustain a living. Local Okinawan workers employed on bases also
worked long hours and their workloads were extremely demanding.
In 1948, local waterside workers organized strike action at the Naha Military
Port, because of the demanding labour and low pay. In response, RYCOM closed
the community grocery stores and threatened to stop the residents’ food rations,
which worsened already serious material shortages. But the food ration incident
had a predictably perverse effect: the demand for autonomy and protest activities
against the US authorities dramatically increased. The OPP played a very active
role here, organizing collective action, using speeches and small meetings in villages
and towns across Okinawa to mobilize opposition to the food restrictions (Okinawa
Henkan Dōmei 1969: 67).
In 1952 and 1953, road workers and construction workers went on a series of
strikes, demanding improvement of basic conditions such as decent accommodation
and payment of suspended wages. In June 1952 local road workers staged a strike
against the Nihon Road Company (Nihon Doro Gaisha), a subsidiary company of
the Shimizu Construction Company (Shimizu Kensetsu). They engaged in another
strike for similar reason in1953 at a macadamization site in Motobu, a northwest
village in Okinawa Island (Nakano and Arasaki 1976: 65). As soon as the strikes
were publicized in newspapers, the issue of labour exploitation attracted strong
empathy from the Okinawan public. Thus, one journalist noted:
In public places, such as public baths, barbershops and pubs, people discussed
the conditions of the workers: ‘They are treated like domestic animals’, ‘How