“…On the one hand, some scholars have seen the activities of some postwar institutions such as the ‘emperor system’, the controversial Yasukuni Shrine, the National Association of Shrines (Jinja Honchō), and various right‐leaning political groups such as the Shintō Seiji Renmei as evidence of the continued postwar survival of a nationalistic state religion (Breen and Teeuwen, , 199–220; Mullins, ). On the other hand, recent research has questioned the historical accuracy, internal consistency, or analytic coherence of the term ‘State Shintō’ (Okuyama, ); a small body of scholarship has attempted to take the idea of ‘non‐religious Shintō’ or a ‘Shintō secular’ seriously without necessarily condoning wartime practices or policies (Josephson, ; Scheid, ). Where one falls on the interpretive spectrum of this politically charged issue depends largely on the type of evidence one prefers and the basic political orientations one brings to the topic of the Occupation, but neither position should be rejected out of hand.…”