An important motif of modernizing or potentially modernizing countries at the turn of the 20th century is the sense of nationalist duty that certain writers and intellectuals seem to impart in their descriptions of the processes of visibly modernizing their respective nations. This is not done identically across the board, however. Yukichi seems initially hesitant to embrace the spread of Westernization, remarking that “[Eastern nations] may be all right if they are resolved to defend themselves to the end in resistance to the force of the eastward advance of their civilization” (129). However, he concedes that doing so is not a prudent survival strategy, and then pivots to a nearly apologist position of the Western spread. Notable is his rhetoric that describes the great advanced mentality and innovation of the Japanese as a whole, and how they would inevitably be dragged down by perceptions of backwardness if they did not seize this opportunity to become productive world players with modern technology and thinking. China and Korea are preemptively scapegoated for contrast in this regard. All of this is rooted in a newly modern sense of national identity, of Japan as an island nation with great history and a responsibility to preserve their own greatness.
Similarly, “The Export Boom as Modernity” and its accompanying interview with former Mexican president Porfirio Diaz discusses the duality of progress in Latin America, with many native or supposedly undesirable populations becoming victims of progress as modernization took root, but both the author and interviewer James Creelman seem to take the a stance of utilitarianism, deciding that such progress is beneficial to the nation at large, even if it means cracking a few bones in the process. The author discusses how Mexico leapt out of a state of chaos for the benefit of Mexico as a nation in the modern sense of a nation. New infrastructure and visible signs of progress were good for the welfare and dignity of Mexicans. Creelman, on the other hand, seems to flatter the cult of personality, hero-nationalist status of Porfirio, complementing the beauty of Mexico (as well as the handsome former general himself) while seeming able to overlook the iron fist of his military-inspired rule to achieve progress. This was yet another product of nationalism and national pride, regalling Mexico as a whole rather than just a city or a subset of the population.
The case of the lecture on Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, may have been somewhat different when compared with the previous two sources. There was no evidence that Brazilian greatness was used as a driver of progress. However, inspiration from European cities and mannerisms, combined with an enthusiasm for mass European immigration to “whiten” their population, are evident of some sort of efforts to mold their nation into a model that they see fit.