I just heard that this is the first time since 1986 that the LDP has an overall majority on its own.

It was also interesting to see the New Komei party boss cautioning the LDP about becoming too comfortable with their new overwhelming majority (as in the LDP does not need New Komei to govern any more).

Sorry, unlike most of you I am disappointed that Koizumi won. This autocrat is truly bad news for Japan. F

Actually, Kokuryu, faction-based politics were considerably weakened even before the election. Ryutaro Hashimoto was the direct factional descendant of Kakuei Tanaka and Noboru Takeshita, but he couldn’t control his own faction any more, some of whom supported Koizumi, and retired with this election. His son ran, but was a supporter of privatization.

There are no more factions of the large swaggering type that were still dominant up until 15 years ago. Considering the group orientation of Japanese society, is it not unreasonable to expect a move from one state to another without a transitionary period? (which I think this still is)

It would be in Japan’s best interest to have a viable opposition, but you have to have a viable opposition before you can have a viable opposition. Okada was clearly in over his head. He didn’t look ready to take over a government at all. His wooden, hyper-serious campaign style didn’t help either. And at that, he was an improvement over Kan, who looks like he just woke up from a hangover, and Hatoyama, who comes off as an airheaded bon-bon.

Consider this: before Koizumi dissolved the Diet, a lot of people thought he was making a big mistake. A not insignificant element of opinion thought it would split the LDP and lead to a DPJ victory. Perhaps with more appealing people and a coherent policy, it would have led to a DPJ victory.

I saw a brief segment this AM on Asahi TV, in which the host of the program, grousing about the result, told a DPJ politician that the Japanese public was still “immature” when it came to politicians (shades of Peter Jennings in 1994).

The charge that Koizumi is an autocrat is an interesting one. I read excerpts of a round table discussion recently between foreign correspondents in Japan, and the British reporter said that he thought Koizumi wasn’t autocratic at all. He’s just using the parliamentary democracy system in the same way that Western politicians use it. (He also faulted Koizumi for his China policy, however.)

Some in Japan dislike this and call it autocratic because their perception of democracy may be different than in the West.

I read some commentary more than 15 years ago now by a Westerner who argued that the Japanese had modified the concept of democracy to fit their group-oriented, consensus based society. This resulted in the system of factions and decisions that got hammered out by endless discussion behind the scenes instead of decisions taken by a leader.

In a way, Koizumi’s popularity may be a manifestation of changes in Japanese society more toward an individual orientation and away from a group orientation.

Point(s) taken. Ampontan, but I’m still very pessimistic about Koizumi’s chances to push through some kind of meaningful reform package. It would be nice to see a situation where postal reform and restructuring occurs almost immediately, rather than at some point, many years in the future. The thing is, if this is desirable for Koizumi and the reformers, how will they impose their will on fellow party members who, despite the “mandate-setting” results of a landslide election, still wish to preserve the old, pork-barrel style politics (and once again oppose meaningful postal reform)?

Outside of Abe and his control of party spending, Koizumi has no mechanism to enforce his will. Japan has no system of party discipline – there is no caucus disobient party members can be expelled from, there is no whip to ensure party members vote as a block during crucial votes, there is no sense of discipline. The culture just doesn’t exist.

So, once again, how is Koizumi going to make sure this majority works for meaningful reform (assuming that reform of the system is indeed a goal this government is going to pursue) rather than against him, in order to preserve the status quo?

Neither. It’s Ko – i – zumi. CNN only takes the trouble to learn how to pronounce Spanish properly, and that pronunciation is harder to learn than Japanese.

“about how the nail that sticks out in Japan always gets hammered in”
Hmm I’m not too sure that this election necessarily reflects Japanese society as a whole. In Australia we have a political system which is _very_ party oriented, it’s extremely rare that a politician would vote against their own party, but that is just an artifact of the political system, and doesn’t really represent much beyond that (well, AFAIK).

Other than that, this election seems to show that at least there is a different way of doing politics in Japan, the old ways are not ingrained.

Navel-Gazing On 9/11 Blues

Four years ago, my fiancee and I had a bitter argument, and then the World Trade Center collapsed. Well, not exactly, but that’s how it seems now. The specacle of of such a diabolically conceived terrorist act humbled whatever it…

“…lead the way…” I wish I could actually post here just once without something awkward like that…

“Now that the DPJ is hovering at around 125 or so, down from 175, is there any hope of a viable two-party system developing in Japan? No.”

You’re expecting a viable two-party system in a system which use proportional representation? That’s a bit hard to do. Japan would already be close to a two-party system without the proportional representation seats, but with it, it’s considerably harder to have one.

Compared to the US PS for example, Japan Post is self-funding; it runs a surplus year after year.

The US Postal Service is self-funding as well. It does not run a surplus necessarily every year, though. Often it will take a year or two of loss before raising rates. They are directed by law to break even in the long run, which they usually accomplish by running a large surplus for a few years after a price raise, and then a deficit for a few years before a price raise. It does have certain advantages regarding tax-exempt treatment, a legal monopoly on first and third class letters (an exemption made for “extremely urgent” letters, provided that the carrier charges at least $3 or twice what the USPS charges, whichever is greater), and a few other things. (It is also paid by the taxpayer for mail that by law must be mailed free of charge, such as overseas ballots, mail for the blind, etc.) The price for first-class mail is quite cheap compared to European countries as well.

Certainly the Army Corps of Engineers was willing to build better levees that would have stopped the flooding. Of course those levees would have hasted the destruction of the delta and the wetlands; there’s a reason why a lawsuit in the ’70s stopped the plans, as the Corps of Engineers hadn’t done the requisite environmental impact statement. The Army Corps of Engineers likes to pave over everything with concrete. There are reasons to not go too far, and reasons to think that Japan has gone too far in some areas with paving over and wasting money. (And in the US as well with highway funds– so much was spent on useless projects, even in Louisiana, that could have been better spent on levees.) Not all infrastructure spending is equal– and when so much can be spent without accountability, that can decrease how much goes to the really useful projects.

Japan already has a two-party system. Friday night parties and Saturday night parties. A shoe-in for everyone!

Your English is fine, though I’m not sure if you support the implementation of a jinken yogo hoan law.