Last week, political philosopher Antonio Negri visited Japan, so I went to hear his lecture, "Multitude and Power: The World After March 11."

Negri argues that in today's world, neither bureaucratized and systematized governments nor markets can ultimately act as agents of change. Instead, "a particular civil society, the multitude," will be the agent of change.

By "civil society," he means a leaderless entity, as seen in the Occupy movement that began in 2011 and the Arab Spring of 2010. He believes that Japan, where various demonstrations and movements have spread since March 11, also plays a part in the global spread of the multitude.

As Negri says, has Japan changed since March 11? Will the "era" spread beyond borders? While the scale of demonstrations focused on the specific issue of nuclear power is the largest since the Security Treaty protests, unfortunately, this has not translated into electoral results. In her book "A Paradise Built in Hell," Rebecca Solnit uses examples of post-disaster reconstruction in countries such as the United States, Mexico, and Canada to demonstrate how reconstruction always advances through some kind of non-elite civil society movement. However, she argues that this does not emerge immediately, but rather develops gradually. When faced with the major challenge of a disaster, humans seem to be motivated to break away from existing systems, creatively create new utopias, and take social action. While earthquake stories have become less prominent in newspapers, awareness of the issue seems to have become relatively strong in the fields of architecture and art since March 11. Post-disaster "utopias" are truly being expressed in creative and design settings. The defining feature of these "utopias" is that, unlike the popular 1960s, they are not simply about expressing "utopia," but rather are expressed through "social commitment." These expressions are far more sensual and mature in the sense of commitment than those of the 1960s. In the creative field, the "era" certainly transcends national borders.

As a student, I often think back to the 1960s and 1970s, when anti-Vietnam, civil rights, and anti-dictatorship movements were gaining momentum worldwide, and when the Security Treaty protests and student movements were at their peak in Japan. "If only I'd been born in that era, my student days would have been even more thrilling..."

But isn't it precisely because we live in an era that is in many ways more mature and thrilling than the 1960s and 1970s? I can't help but feel that way.