Some Japanese people’s “inferiority complex” toward the US

It’s been 5 months since I posted the last entry. My hectic work schedule kept me from making any new entries. Though this situation seems to go unabated for a while, I’d like to write about what has made me really surprised in the last few weeks.

Recently Japanese prime minister Noda has decided to take part in the negotiations which enable Japan to join the TPP or the Trans-Pacific Strategic Economic Partnership. Those who oppose Japan’s joining the TPP wage a fierce opposition campaign.

In fact this kind of opposition has been well anticipated, so it’s no surprise to me. Instead, what made me really amazed was their anti-American feelings, or to more precisely put their deep “inferiority complex” toward the US. This “inferiority complex” is observed among both rightists and leftists alike. I’ve never thought of some Japanese people’s “inferiority complex” toward the US as this huge. There’s a long way to go for some Japanese people to politically mature enough.

The fiasco the DPJ and its government are creating nowadays

I’ve been speechless at the fiasco the DPJ(Democratic Party of Japan) and its government are creating nowadays.

Firstly, after the G-8 (or G-7?) summit meeting was over, some of the antimainstream factions of the DPJ threatened to vote for the no-confidence motion against the Kan Cabinet which the opposition parties were going to submit to the Diet. Their call gathered strength.

Secondly, facing the prospect of the no-confidence motion passing, Prime Minister Kan had a talk with the former Prime Minister Hatoyama, who himself was trying to push Kan out of the job of Prime Minister. The next morning just before the no-confidence motion vote, Prime Minister Kan told before the whole DPJ MPs that he would step down at a not-so-distant-future time.

Thirdly, after listening to Kan’s speech, many MPs of the DPJ voted against the no-confidence motion and therefore the motion failed. Almost every Japanese including me thought that the Kan cabinet would resign en masse within a month or two, that another one would be installed thereafter, that the crucial reconstruction planning related to the 3/11 earthquake, tsunami and the Fukushima nuclear crisis would be delayed during that time, and that Japanese politics is crap after all.

Fourthly, the next day, however, Kan hinted that he would like to do the job until the Fukushima nuclear power reactors are finally under control, which meant he would serve another half a year or so. His remark made many pols, ruling and opposition parties alike, stunned. Even the Asahi Shimbun Newspaper, who virtually support the DPJ over the LDP(Liberal Democratic Party), was perplexed.

Fifthly, because a lot of MPs, mass media, intellectuals, bloggers, business leaders and many more people criticised Kan, Kan’s close allies started to downplay what previously he said.

“Sigh.” This seems to be going on and on. The DPJ apparently puts their party’s interest over the interest of the country. Majority of DPJ MPs are probably thinking only of next Lower House general election, which is scheduled to be in 2013. I have to admit at the same time that Japanese politics corresponds approximately to the maturity level of Japanese people. I guess that many of the Japanese people know this. They are definitely seeing Japanese stupid pols like seeing themselves in a mirror. As a whole, you can’t have better politicians than common people deserve to have after all.

Today I barely managed an hour or so to write this entry. But, due to my work I’m afraid I can’t blog another few weeks either:(

One of the reasons civil peace lasted more than 260 years in the Edo Period(1603-1867)

Yesterday I discussed that frequent natural disasters Japan had experienced played a big part in shaping relatively weaker power Japanese rulers had over their subordinates and the commoners before modern times.

Some of our readers may wonder if frequent natural disasters rather would have demanded the literally absolute power for Japanese rulers. I think it was not really the case with regard to natural disasters and subsequent reconstruction work, because Japanese people simply had to live with natural disasters and accept its often devastating outcomes before modern times.

There were a lot of big natural disasters recorded during the Edo Period(1603-1867). You will find out that almost no feudal lords met serious revolts from the subordinates or the commoners during the subsequent hard times brought about by the natural disasters.

The only exception was when drought-induced famine made peasants devastated and unable to pay tax(=rice). (It was not “tax” in a present-day sense of course.) Except for peasant uprisings during famine, natural disasters didn’t threaten the legitimacy of the rulers, I guess.

I’m no expert on feudal Europe. So, I can’t make any comparison between Europe and Japan. In the Edo Period(1603-1867) Japanese ruling caste, Samurais, resided in so-called castle towns. They didn’t set foot in farming villages unless needed and basically left everyday affairs in the hands of affluent farmers. Japanese farming villages in the Edo Period were an autonomous region, so to speak. (I’ve heard that Vietnamese society in feudal times was somewhat similar to that of Japan.)

Anyway my point is that in the Edo Period Japanese rulers’ power was relatively weaker and not much abusive to their subordinates and commoners. That was why domestic civil peace lasted more than 260 years. Then, European style rule of law might seem to not have a chance to take hold if it was in the almost same way. (This topic is still to be continued…:)

Natural disasters and one Japanese characteristic

I have a feeling that the majority of Japanese people don’t know the rule of law in a modern sense was first introduced in Western Europe in order to control the unrestrained power of the monarch. In Japan law had always been enacted by the rulers in order to govern the subordinates and the commoners.

There were some reasons for this.
1) Generally speaking, Japanese rulers (both Shoguns and Emperors) did not have absolute power in the true sense of the term in the first place. This characteristic is still observed in many of Japanese corporations even now. The real power oftentimes lies in the mid-level cadres in there. Japanese CEOs and Chairpersons sometimes just approve important decisions the mid-level cadres discussed and decided among themselves beforehand. This is a stark contrast to, for example, American way of decision-making, which is typically top-down and individual. This way of doing things has been slowly changing, but it’ll take a long time for the majority of Japanese people to adopt the new way.

2) Why is it then that Japanese rulers did not have absolute power in the true sense of the term (over the subordinates and the commoners)? I’d like to present two reasons. Firstly, Japan had not been, except for one occasion, attacked or invaded from other nations in a massive scale in its recorded history until modern times. Unlike Continental Europe or China where due to incessant military conflicts among different nations and ethnic groups the monarchs definitely needed absolute power, Japanese rulers tended not to need it.

Secondly, though you may think it’s ridiculous, I think natural disasters such as earthquake, tsunami, volcanic eruption, flooding (and subsequent poverty, famine, and so on) which periodically and inescapably come around played a decisive role in shaping the above-mentioned characteristic. As you may already know, Japan is prone to many big natural disasters. Before modern times, the periodical and inescapable natural disasters might have brought about wise leaders, not strong leaders, and a bottom-up decision-making style among governing bodies.

I know I’m discussing things in a simplistic way. But it’s for the sake of simple explanation:) This topic is still to be continued…

A layman’s view on the origin of the rule of law

The Hamaoka nuclear power plant episode seems to tell us that Japanese general public is more concerned about nuclear power plant safety than cares about the principal of the rule of law. I’m not insisting that this mindset is wrong, but it may be interesting to analyse what the rule of law means to ordinary Japanese people.

I think that the rule of law as the main social system was born in Western Europe. From around the 15th century there were conflicts between monarchs and nobles starting to arise. These conflicts took various courses and shapes. Sometimes the monarch won, other times the nobles won. In an extreme case the monarch system was overthrown and a republican government was installed.

In the course of these conflicts various attempts to restrict the power of the king were taken by the nobles and newly emerging classes. I guess this is the origin of the rule of law in a modern sense. I didn’t major in legal history. Probably, in terms of the legal doctrine, the ancient Roman law text must have played a big role. I’m chiefly focusing here on how the rule of law was first institutionalised in Western Europe.

I’m not saying that this was the exemplary progress of history. This was just one of many types various peoples produced. There have been a lot of governing systems and law in accordance with social structure, history, custom, religion, and so on.

The thing is Japanese governing systems and law were not brought about in the same manner as that of Western Europe. There have been some differences even among Far East Asian regions. (This topic is to be continued. I’m not a history major and I just try to present a layman’s view here, hehe:)

Some legal issues concerning the Hamaoka nuclear power plant shut-down and the response of the general public

As I wrote yesterday, I’ll talk about an interesting issue Prime Minister Kan’s “request” raised concerning the Hamaoka nuclear power plant shut-down. But before doing so, let’s look at how the Japanese general public responded to Prime Minister’s request.

According to the public opinion poll conducted by Kyodo News Agency, 66% support Prime Minister’s request, which practically, without any legal basis, makes Chubu Electric Power Company, a private company, cost hundreds of billions of yen and fall into the red this fiscal year. Besides, of the major five nationally circulated newspapers, four of them favorably reported the “request.” Only one newspaper, Sankei Shimbun, was against it.

It seems to me that these clearly indicate the Japanese general public is more concerned about a nuclear power plant accident than the mere principal of the rule of law. I have no idea as to how politically matured or sound these responses are. If so, has the Japanese general public become anti-nuclear power? Apparently, no. Recent several public opinion polls have shown that though those against nuclear power are gaining ground, majority are still not against it.

The only explanation that the Japanese general public supports the Hamaoka plant shut-down is Japanese people see the risk during the coming two years when additional safety measures are being taken far greater than they ignore it. Again I don’t know if this mindset is rational or not.

Quite a few critics insisted that Prime Minister’s “request” this time had no legal basis. Prime Minister Kan himself admitted it and he said at the press conference that it was a “request,” not an order since he had no legal power to order the Hamaoka shut-down. (This topic is to be continued…)

Isn’t Japan a country which employs the rule of law?

Earlier this month, Prime Minister Kan “requested” that Chubu Electric Power Company shut down the Hamaoka Nuclear Power Plant, which is located about 190km away from Tokyo, until newly drawn out safety measures are complete. This meant that if Chubu Electric Power Company accepted the request the Hamaoka Plant would go out of use for at least 2-3 years. As you may know it’s already gotten the case. All of the nuclear power reactors at the Hamaoka Plant have been shut down.

The major reason the Kan government made the request is that the probability that a magnitude-8 class earthquake will hit the plant within 30 years is 87%. I must say that I myself really don’t know how much this stochastic simulation is correct. The same stochastic simulation, which is issued by a government organization, before the 3/11 earthquake said the probability that a big earthquake would hit the Fukushima plant was 0%. So, I have no idea if the shut-down of the Hamaoka plant is appropriate or not.

Instead, I’d like to discuss some other things that relate to this “request” Prime Minister Kan made. I think it raises an interesting point. As many people already pointed out, this “request” had no legal basis under Japanese law. Isn’t Japan a country which employs the rule of law? What is the working principle of Japanese society and politics?

I can’t present the whole issue in only several entries of course. I’ll only talk about how different Japanese society approaches the rule of law in the following entries.