12 ms·

Japanese government dismantles freedom of the press

237 points by sprucely 11y ago

pm24601 11y ago
Once again the US exporting "corporate democracy"
- crimsonalucard 11y ago
  Don't blame the united states for everything. Totally unlike the situation described in the article, I can assure you that Americans have all the freedom in the world to criticize the government. We are fortunate in that regard.
  - Retric 11y ago
    The US government found many ways to cut back on free speech. Most direct is probably the fact you don't get to stay part of the Presidents press core if you regularly say bad things about them. But, there are thousands of little things that add up to surprising levels of control.
    - krapp 11y ago
      That's hardly an effective way of suppressing dissent or criticism against the President. The press corps is not the press.
      - Retric 11y ago
        On it's own it's not a big deal, but you don't control 320 million people doing just one thing. So, the surprising thing is not that it works, but that nobody thinks of it in terms of free speech. After all, of course news organizations will chase profits so access becomes a useful tool. PS: Press releases are not just a means of corporations using lazy reporters to spread there message.
        krapp 11y ago
        I don't think it's entirely fair to characterize Americans as being "controlled" by the media or the government. If the president (Obama in particular) had that much power to influence popular opinion through propaganda, we would have an actual national healthcare plan right now.
        Retric 11y ago
        The US government does not have a single viewpoint so it's message is not unified on a wide range of issues. But, things like the food pyramid have a huge impact on how people think. Consider, did the Fed have anything to do with the recent housing bubble and burst? Well, bubbles become self sustaining up to a point, but was there anything that caused a huge amount of money to slosh into the housing market? Now, let's take a step back. Are houses a good investment in the abstract?
        mirimir 11y ago
        What's the basis for believing that President Obama wanted an "actual national healthcare plan"? Did he get negligible funding from the health insurance sector?
  - SwimAway 11y ago
    Fortunate? Freedom of speech (et al.) is a birthright, NOT a privilege. If only the people of Japan stood up for their rights..
    - scribu 11y ago
      > If only the people of Japan stood up for their rights.. As mentioned in the article, there already are massive protests around this issue. What more could they do? Try to take down the government by force? Even if they succeeded, I'm sure the U.S. would be happy to step in to "calm the waters" and impose martial law outright.
      - gozur88 11y ago
        They don't need to have a violent revolution. They can just vote for a different party in the next election cycle. If the votes aren't there, revolution wouldn't succeed anyway.
        thanksgiving 11y ago
        Revolutions do not need a majority. I think our best guess is that fewer than a third of the then colonists (USA) supported the proclamation of independence. It is true though that with FPTP, you don't really need a majority to win elections either so it might be a wash.
        rangibaby 11y ago
        "They can just vote for a different party in the next election cycle." The last time they tried that (2009), the different party was literally more of the same. The only thing worth mentioning about the following two elections was their extremely low turnout (the lowest ever in Japan's modern history in the latter).
    - hasenj 11y ago
      The difference between a right and a privilege seems to be a matter of definition ..
  - laotzu 11y ago
    >Totally unlike the situation described in the article, I can assure you that Americans have all the freedom in the world to criticize the government. I'm assuming you have not studied what happened to Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., the last American of his level of influence to fundamentally criticize the government. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martin_Luther_King,_Jr.#FBI_and_King.27s_personal_life https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martin_Luther_King,_Jr.#FBI_an...
    - crusso 11y ago
      Yes, and much more recently we had the IRS stifling political groups that oppose the current administration. But there's a difference between government stifling of speech illegally and government stifling of speech legally. At least with the former there are legal avenues that can be pursued to correct the situation.
      - cuckcuckspruce 11y ago
        There's not much difference to the person being stifled, at least, not initially. Yes, you can litigate absurdly expensive court battles (assuming the government allows itself to be sued), have your voice silenced for the years and years your case takes to work its way through the courts, and then, assuming you win, finally get to say what you want a whole decade or more after the fact. Legal avenues are great like that for people that want to delay, distract, and disrupt.
        crusso 11y ago
        There's not much difference to the person being stifled, at least, not initially. There's a huge difference between a government being able to send the police in broad daylight to do its bidding and beat you up or jail you for breaking the "subversive speech law" vs having to deal with some bureaucratic agency making you jump through endless hoops trying to get your group's 501c tax status. That's all before you even think about getting into a courtroom.
  - hasenj 11y ago
    To his credit, the article does mention: > For many years, Washington’s Japan-handlers have pressed Tokyo to introduce repressive legislation to protect secrets concerning the US-Japan security alliance
meesles 11y ago
For a country whose culture already stifles expression and speech, this is bad news. I'm proud that supposedly so many Japanese stood up to protest these legislative actions. Having lived there, I can say that the government comes across as way more untouchable and heightened than here in the US, and that it takes a LOT before action can be taken against them. The US messing in their politics in order to get more aid in their wars is infuriating and makes me worry for the future of such a rich country.
- kagamine 11y ago
  Had a friend who lived in Japan for 35 years whose opinion of Japanese politics was basically that the ruling party were the largest and most powerful of the triad gangs.
  - ionised 11y ago
    You mean Yakuza, not Triad?
    - kagamine 11y ago
      yes
mtgx 11y ago
Why does it look like democracy is on a declining trend all over the world, even as the Internet is more used by more people than ever?
- webkike 11y ago
  Observer bias
  - PlzSnow 11y ago
    Indeed, we live in a time of unprecedented democracy. But confirmation bias reigns supreme, people read from news sources which confirm their preconceived notions of the world. The Hacker News community is as susceptible to this as anyone else.
- toyg 11y ago
  Exactly because the internet is used by more people than ever. On one side, the bad guys find it increasingly difficult to hide their misbehaviours, to which they react with crackdowns; on the other, the average person is now so swamped in information and things to do/watch/read, that his or her appetite for old-school organizing is vastly diminished (politics is slooooow, terribly boring, usually frustrating and occasionally humiliating).
ilurk 11y ago
I feel saddened by this this. But at the same time I see Japan in a very complicated situation with China expanding its maritime influence in the region. If it doesn't flex its military muscle (needing the secracy for it) it may find itself in a vulnerable situation against China. Although on the other hand it really doesn't stand a chance against China's nuclear arsenal. If China used a nuclear warhead would the US riposte in the same manner? What I don't get is the "Japan to battle in the middle east". Is this a "you scratch my back and I scratch yours"? Or just a cover for not saying "we're preparing for an eventual conflict with China"?
- xlm1717 11y ago
  What makes it even harder to understand is that it was basically the US that forced Japan to demilitarize after WW2. Now we want to ask them to fight our wars? The possible cover for not saying "we're preparing for an eventual conflict with China" is even more troubling. It was previously the case that the US would handle Japan's defense and the Self Defense Forces would, of course, provide self-defense. Are they planning for a conflict that is not defensive? It is indeed a very complicated situation.
  - mahranch 11y ago
    > the US that forced Japan to demilitarize after WW2. Now we want to ask them to fight our wars? To be fair, the U.S has literally been asking Japan to change its constitution since 1968. They've been trying to get them to be actual military allies for 50 years now. Understandably, Japan has been perfectly fine with the status quo. And who can blame them? They had Uncle Sam footing their defense bill -- at least, until recently. Now Japan has to pay the U.S for that protection in a cost sharing agreement. The U.S wanted to close up shop and leave. They also wanted to leave South Korea as well, believe it or not. Both countries now pay the U.S to be there.
    - Cyberdog 11y ago
      > To be fair, the U.S has literally been asking Japan to change its constitution since 1968. They've been trying to get them to be actual military allies for 50 years now. Before that, actually. As early as the late 1940s, once it became clear that the Cold War was going to be a thing, the US was leaning on Japan to beef up militarily in the hopes of countering Soviet influence in the area. Savvy politicians in the era were not necessarily pacifist, but they could say "gee, sorry guys, but the Article 9 that you put in our constitution won't let us. Guess you'll have to keep your bases here and help defend us from those darn Soviets yourselves," then throw the money they saved not having to field a military towards economic development instead.
pippy 11y ago
It's happening in New Zealand to a similar extent. This current government is raiding journalists homes who publish things they don't want[1] [2]. Even more worryingly the government recently bailed out the other major broadcasting company, and replaced the CEO with a friend of the prime minister. It didn't take long before journalists who were sometimes critical of the government were replaced [3]. 1 https://www.tvnz.co.nz/one-news/new-zealand/hager-police-raid-dangerous-for-journalism-6099331 https://www.tvnz.co.nz/one-news/new-zealand/hager-police-rai... 2 http://www.radionz.co.nz/news/national/290989/police-raid-du-plessis-allan's-home http://www.radionz.co.nz/news/national/290989/police-raid-du... 3 http://www.nzherald.co.nz/entertainment/news/article.cfm?c_id=1501119&objectid=11462265 http://www.nzherald.co.nz/entertainment/news/article.cfm?c_i...
hackuser 11y ago
Neo-nationalism seems to be on the rise everywhere. Look at the UK (Scotland trying to secede, the crazy extreme right-wing party getting seats in Parliament, etc.), France (the National Front did very well in recent elections), South Korea (IIRC, textbooks are edited to replace history with nationalist propaganda), Israel, Turkey, Russia, China, Donald Trump, etc. etc. When is the last time you heard someone stand up and point out how dangerous nationalism is, how it's historically led to wars, massacres, and other oppression and brutality. I suspect the public, hearing no criticism or counterpoints, goes along with the nationalists. Where are the liberal and moderate conservative elite? Asleep at the wheel? Cowed? Complacent?
- ue_ 11y ago
  I would have hoped the world moved on to post-nationalism by this point. I can't say I had much hope for it, though. I don't know if it's right to link all the countries which seem to be heading toward a more nationalistic government together, though. I think each case has its own causes and conditions. For example, in some parts of Europe, it's the real or perceived threat to national security, and lots of reporting on terrorist attacks, and party leaders knowing how to take advantage of this. What's the cause in Japan? Could it be that there's fear over what's happening in Europe, or could it be a threat from China, or something else completely? The question is interesting to me, as I'm a wannabe immigrant. What would life be like if the trend continues? As I said, for my own wellbeing and happiness, I would have hoped we'd be heading toward post-nationalism. It's as if the "us and them" divide in Japan (this is the only country I know of) wasn't strong enough already.
  - sirkneeland 11y ago
    >What's the cause in Japan? Could it be that there's fear over what's happening in Europe, or could it be a threat from China, or something else completely? Threat of China, and the sense of angst that comes from 2 decades of economic stagnation, I'd wager...
    - deleted 11y ago
      [deleted]
wtn 11y ago
I have never seen the emdash overused this badly.
codingthebeach 11y ago
"In preparation to join US wars, Japan dismantles freedom of the press". What US wars? Populist hogswaddle. Such assertions should be backed up if you're going to make them. As for the supposed rise of "nationalism", to the average liberal, ANY movement in the direction of national security, or any display of pride in one's country, is not just nationalism but fascism, racism, and worse.
- codingthebeach 11y ago
  @sprucely -- thanks for the downvote -- you prove my point. https://news.ycombinator.com/user?id=sprucely https://news.ycombinator.com/user?id=sprucely
  - PhasmaFelis 11y ago
    What are you trying to do here? You think you know who downvoted you, and you're...calling them out? By...linking to their public user page?
- PhasmaFelis 11y ago
  The problem is, you claim you want liberals to love America, but what you actually want is for them to love only the specific idea of America that you've constructed. If I say "I love America because it was founded on the idea that liberty is more important than security," then you put me down in the "hates America" column.
alexandercrohde 11y ago
I wish this post gave a better treatment to the discussion. By presenting such a stark claim on a blog, with little justification it leads to polarization that may make some who are open-minded to the issue actually take such concerns less seriously. I don't have any answers myself, I'm learning a lot but here's what I glean: - Reporters without borders (RWB) is a neutral cause dedicated to investigating freedom of the press in various countries, they explain their methodology on their website. - RWB has moved Japan down to 61 on the list of nations with the most free press. However, the US is at 49 for comparison, so saying Japan has "Dismantled freedom of the press" because they are 61 seems to be an overstatement - The piece presents a theory that America is trying to use Japan's military. Time will tell. - The style comes across as vaguely rambly If anybody who's not too emotionally involved in the topic has some recommended reading I'd love to hear more.
euske 11y ago
So, as an average citizen in the country, what should I do? I'm just a tech geek guy. I write software at work, and I teach sometimes (for CS related topics). I write OSS. I occasionally write a blog, but feel terribly helpless for spreading my view with that. I don't think going to a rally helps the cause that much (because I feel it only pleases the curious media). I'm probably a bit more politically aware than the average people here, but I don't want to devote myself to much political activities. Probably I should continue to do the small things that I'm currently doing (e.g. occasionally bringing up the topic to friends and advocating more openness of the society, etc.), but what else? Does anyone have any idea?
deleted 11y ago
[deleted]
Fando 11y ago
If you could redesign a system of government free from major flaws we see today, how would it work? Current systems almost seem to have a tendency to "breed" the types of malevolent, inefficient, greedy and problematic power structures we see. I think that at the root of the problem are natural human flaws. It seems almost certain that given enough time, no matter how well intentioned people are, the cumulative effect of our natural flaws inevitably evolves the kind of system/culture that attracts and perpetuates these flawed tendencies. I think the process could be compared to natural selection. Has anyone thought about it like that? I'm curious. Is it possible to design a system of government which would not be influenced by inherent human flaws? A system which, by design, has a tendency to "select" characteristics that shape it to be more beneficial, free from its current flaws?
- Qantourisc 11y ago
  Pick 30 random people and replace them every 3 months. The new laws have to be voted on by either a referendum or a large random draft (1000 people) (which are also often replaced). Problems are: keeping the random random. People in general making immature decision, like lowering the taxes.
  - adrianN 11y ago
    Good luck implementing anything that takes longer than three months to bear fruit.
- monort 11y ago
  Remove a government monopoly and solve the problem with competition: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polycentric_law https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polycentric_law
- ionised 11y ago
  Some form of sortition probably; https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sortition https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sortition Basically treat political office as a civic duty, much like jury duty. Give them a very generous salary and have a maximum term after which they can never be reinstated. Also ban completely any form of financial lobbying.
acd 11y ago
I think that the Japan public debt house is starting to crackle and they do not want the public to know. Thus they are silencing the media. Here is a graph of Japanese debt to GDP ratio http://www.tradingeconomics.com/japan/government-debt-to-gdp http://www.tradingeconomics.com/japan/government-debt-to-gdp Here is demographic Changes in Japan's population. It shows a top slope, population starting to fall. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_Japan#/media/File:Population_of_Japan_since_1872.svg https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_Japan#/media/F... So a retiring Japanese population is going to pay for rising public debt. Sustainable in the long run?
- jld89 11y ago
  You forgot to mention that Japan is the biggest creditor in the world and the one that possesses more foreign net assets than even China. So even if debt is colossal, it has the assets to maintain it for a long time.

237 points by sprucely 11y ago

pm24601 11y ago

Once again the US exporting "corporate democracy"

crimsonalucard 11y ago
Don't blame the united states for everything. Totally unlike the situation described in the article, I can assure you that Americans have all the freedom in the world to criticize the government. We are fortunate in that regard.
- Retric 11y ago
  The US government found many ways to cut back on free speech. Most direct is probably the fact you don't get to stay part of the Presidents press core if you regularly say bad things about them. But, there are thousands of little things that add up to surprising levels of control.
  - krapp 11y ago
    That's hardly an effective way of suppressing dissent or criticism against the President. The press corps is not the press.
    - Retric 11y ago
      On it's own it's not a big deal, but you don't control 320 million people doing just one thing. So, the surprising thing is not that it works, but that nobody thinks of it in terms of free speech. After all, of course news organizations will chase profits so access becomes a useful tool. PS: Press releases are not just a means of corporations using lazy reporters to spread there message.
      - krapp 11y ago
        I don't think it's entirely fair to characterize Americans as being "controlled" by the media or the government. If the president (Obama in particular) had that much power to influence popular opinion through propaganda, we would have an actual national healthcare plan right now.
        Retric 11y ago
        The US government does not have a single viewpoint so it's message is not unified on a wide range of issues. But, things like the food pyramid have a huge impact on how people think. Consider, did the Fed have anything to do with the recent housing bubble and burst? Well, bubbles become self sustaining up to a point, but was there anything that caused a huge amount of money to slosh into the housing market? Now, let's take a step back. Are houses a good investment in the abstract?
        mirimir 11y ago
        What's the basis for believing that President Obama wanted an "actual national healthcare plan"? Did he get negligible funding from the health insurance sector?
- SwimAway 11y ago
  Fortunate? Freedom of speech (et al.) is a birthright, NOT a privilege. If only the people of Japan stood up for their rights..
  - scribu 11y ago
    > If only the people of Japan stood up for their rights.. As mentioned in the article, there already are massive protests around this issue. What more could they do? Try to take down the government by force? Even if they succeeded, I'm sure the U.S. would be happy to step in to "calm the waters" and impose martial law outright.
    - gozur88 11y ago
      They don't need to have a violent revolution. They can just vote for a different party in the next election cycle. If the votes aren't there, revolution wouldn't succeed anyway.
      - thanksgiving 11y ago
        Revolutions do not need a majority. I think our best guess is that fewer than a third of the then colonists (USA) supported the proclamation of independence. It is true though that with FPTP, you don't really need a majority to win elections either so it might be a wash.
      - rangibaby 11y ago
        "They can just vote for a different party in the next election cycle." The last time they tried that (2009), the different party was literally more of the same. The only thing worth mentioning about the following two elections was their extremely low turnout (the lowest ever in Japan's modern history in the latter).
  - hasenj 11y ago
    The difference between a right and a privilege seems to be a matter of definition ..
- laotzu 11y ago
  >Totally unlike the situation described in the article, I can assure you that Americans have all the freedom in the world to criticize the government. I'm assuming you have not studied what happened to Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., the last American of his level of influence to fundamentally criticize the government. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martin_Luther_King,_Jr.#FBI_and_King.27s_personal_life https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martin_Luther_King,_Jr.#FBI_an...
  - crusso 11y ago
    Yes, and much more recently we had the IRS stifling political groups that oppose the current administration. But there's a difference between government stifling of speech illegally and government stifling of speech legally. At least with the former there are legal avenues that can be pursued to correct the situation.
    - cuckcuckspruce 11y ago
      There's not much difference to the person being stifled, at least, not initially. Yes, you can litigate absurdly expensive court battles (assuming the government allows itself to be sued), have your voice silenced for the years and years your case takes to work its way through the courts, and then, assuming you win, finally get to say what you want a whole decade or more after the fact. Legal avenues are great like that for people that want to delay, distract, and disrupt.
      - crusso 11y ago
        There's not much difference to the person being stifled, at least, not initially. There's a huge difference between a government being able to send the police in broad daylight to do its bidding and beat you up or jail you for breaking the "subversive speech law" vs having to deal with some bureaucratic agency making you jump through endless hoops trying to get your group's 501c tax status. That's all before you even think about getting into a courtroom.
- hasenj 11y ago
  To his credit, the article does mention: > For many years, Washington’s Japan-handlers have pressed Tokyo to introduce repressive legislation to protect secrets concerning the US-Japan security alliance

meesles 11y ago

For a country whose culture already stifles expression and speech, this is bad news. I'm proud that supposedly so many Japanese stood up to protest these legislative actions. Having lived there, I can say that the government comes across as way more untouchable and heightened than here in the US, and that it takes a LOT before action can be taken against them. The US messing in their politics in order to get more aid in their wars is infuriating and makes me worry for the future of such a rich country.

kagamine 11y ago
Had a friend who lived in Japan for 35 years whose opinion of Japanese politics was basically that the ruling party were the largest and most powerful of the triad gangs.
- ionised 11y ago
  You mean Yakuza, not Triad?
  - kagamine 11y ago
    yes

mtgx 11y ago

Why does it look like democracy is on a declining trend all over the world, even as the Internet is more used by more people than ever?

webkike 11y ago
Observer bias
- PlzSnow 11y ago
  Indeed, we live in a time of unprecedented democracy. But confirmation bias reigns supreme, people read from news sources which confirm their preconceived notions of the world. The Hacker News community is as susceptible to this as anyone else.
toyg 11y ago
Exactly because the internet is used by more people than ever. On one side, the bad guys find it increasingly difficult to hide their misbehaviours, to which they react with crackdowns; on the other, the average person is now so swamped in information and things to do/watch/read, that his or her appetite for old-school organizing is vastly diminished (politics is slooooow, terribly boring, usually frustrating and occasionally humiliating).

ilurk 11y ago

I feel saddened by this this. But at the same time I see Japan in a very complicated situation with China expanding its maritime influence in the region. If it doesn't flex its military muscle (needing the secracy for it) it may find itself in a vulnerable situation against China. Although on the other hand it really doesn't stand a chance against China's nuclear arsenal. If China used a nuclear warhead would the US riposte in the same manner? What I don't get is the "Japan to battle in the middle east". Is this a "you scratch my back and I scratch yours"? Or just a cover for not saying "we're preparing for an eventual conflict with China"?

xlm1717 11y ago
What makes it even harder to understand is that it was basically the US that forced Japan to demilitarize after WW2. Now we want to ask them to fight our wars? The possible cover for not saying "we're preparing for an eventual conflict with China" is even more troubling. It was previously the case that the US would handle Japan's defense and the Self Defense Forces would, of course, provide self-defense. Are they planning for a conflict that is not defensive? It is indeed a very complicated situation.
- mahranch 11y ago
  > the US that forced Japan to demilitarize after WW2. Now we want to ask them to fight our wars? To be fair, the U.S has literally been asking Japan to change its constitution since 1968. They've been trying to get them to be actual military allies for 50 years now. Understandably, Japan has been perfectly fine with the status quo. And who can blame them? They had Uncle Sam footing their defense bill -- at least, until recently. Now Japan has to pay the U.S for that protection in a cost sharing agreement. The U.S wanted to close up shop and leave. They also wanted to leave South Korea as well, believe it or not. Both countries now pay the U.S to be there.
  - Cyberdog 11y ago
    > To be fair, the U.S has literally been asking Japan to change its constitution since 1968. They've been trying to get them to be actual military allies for 50 years now. Before that, actually. As early as the late 1940s, once it became clear that the Cold War was going to be a thing, the US was leaning on Japan to beef up militarily in the hopes of countering Soviet influence in the area. Savvy politicians in the era were not necessarily pacifist, but they could say "gee, sorry guys, but the Article 9 that you put in our constitution won't let us. Guess you'll have to keep your bases here and help defend us from those darn Soviets yourselves," then throw the money they saved not having to field a military towards economic development instead.

pippy 11y ago

It's happening in New Zealand to a similar extent. This current government is raiding journalists homes who publish things they don't want[1] [2]. Even more worryingly the government recently bailed out the other major broadcasting company, and replaced the CEO with a friend of the prime minister. It didn't take long before journalists who were sometimes critical of the government were replaced [3]. 1 https://www.tvnz.co.nz/one-news/new-zealand/hager-police-raid-dangerous-for-journalism-6099331 https://www.tvnz.co.nz/one-news/new-zealand/hager-police-rai... 2 http://www.radionz.co.nz/news/national/290989/police-raid-du-plessis-allan's-home http://www.radionz.co.nz/news/national/290989/police-raid-du... 3 http://www.nzherald.co.nz/entertainment/news/article.cfm?c_id=1501119&objectid=11462265 http://www.nzherald.co.nz/entertainment/news/article.cfm?c_i...

hackuser 11y ago

Neo-nationalism seems to be on the rise everywhere. Look at the UK (Scotland trying to secede, the crazy extreme right-wing party getting seats in Parliament, etc.), France (the National Front did very well in recent elections), South Korea (IIRC, textbooks are edited to replace history with nationalist propaganda), Israel, Turkey, Russia, China, Donald Trump, etc. etc. When is the last time you heard someone stand up and point out how dangerous nationalism is, how it's historically led to wars, massacres, and other oppression and brutality. I suspect the public, hearing no criticism or counterpoints, goes along with the nationalists. Where are the liberal and moderate conservative elite? Asleep at the wheel? Cowed? Complacent?

ue_ 11y ago
I would have hoped the world moved on to post-nationalism by this point. I can't say I had much hope for it, though. I don't know if it's right to link all the countries which seem to be heading toward a more nationalistic government together, though. I think each case has its own causes and conditions. For example, in some parts of Europe, it's the real or perceived threat to national security, and lots of reporting on terrorist attacks, and party leaders knowing how to take advantage of this. What's the cause in Japan? Could it be that there's fear over what's happening in Europe, or could it be a threat from China, or something else completely? The question is interesting to me, as I'm a wannabe immigrant. What would life be like if the trend continues? As I said, for my own wellbeing and happiness, I would have hoped we'd be heading toward post-nationalism. It's as if the "us and them" divide in Japan (this is the only country I know of) wasn't strong enough already.
- sirkneeland 11y ago
  >What's the cause in Japan? Could it be that there's fear over what's happening in Europe, or could it be a threat from China, or something else completely? Threat of China, and the sense of angst that comes from 2 decades of economic stagnation, I'd wager...
  - deleted 11y ago
    [deleted]

wtn 11y ago

I have never seen the emdash overused this badly.

codingthebeach 11y ago

"In preparation to join US wars, Japan dismantles freedom of the press". What US wars? Populist hogswaddle. Such assertions should be backed up if you're going to make them. As for the supposed rise of "nationalism", to the average liberal, ANY movement in the direction of national security, or any display of pride in one's country, is not just nationalism but fascism, racism, and worse.

codingthebeach 11y ago
@sprucely -- thanks for the downvote -- you prove my point. https://news.ycombinator.com/user?id=sprucely https://news.ycombinator.com/user?id=sprucely
- PhasmaFelis 11y ago
  What are you trying to do here? You think you know who downvoted you, and you're...calling them out? By...linking to their public user page?
PhasmaFelis 11y ago
The problem is, you claim you want liberals to love America, but what you actually want is for them to love only the specific idea of America that you've constructed. If I say "I love America because it was founded on the idea that liberty is more important than security," then you put me down in the "hates America" column.

alexandercrohde 11y ago

I wish this post gave a better treatment to the discussion. By presenting such a stark claim on a blog, with little justification it leads to polarization that may make some who are open-minded to the issue actually take such concerns less seriously. I don't have any answers myself, I'm learning a lot but here's what I glean: - Reporters without borders (RWB) is a neutral cause dedicated to investigating freedom of the press in various countries, they explain their methodology on their website. - RWB has moved Japan down to 61 on the list of nations with the most free press. However, the US is at 49 for comparison, so saying Japan has "Dismantled freedom of the press" because they are 61 seems to be an overstatement - The piece presents a theory that America is trying to use Japan's military. Time will tell. - The style comes across as vaguely rambly If anybody who's not too emotionally involved in the topic has some recommended reading I'd love to hear more.

euske 11y ago

So, as an average citizen in the country, what should I do? I'm just a tech geek guy. I write software at work, and I teach sometimes (for CS related topics). I write OSS. I occasionally write a blog, but feel terribly helpless for spreading my view with that. I don't think going to a rally helps the cause that much (because I feel it only pleases the curious media). I'm probably a bit more politically aware than the average people here, but I don't want to devote myself to much political activities. Probably I should continue to do the small things that I'm currently doing (e.g. occasionally bringing up the topic to friends and advocating more openness of the society, etc.), but what else? Does anyone have any idea?

deleted 11y ago

[deleted]

Fando 11y ago

If you could redesign a system of government free from major flaws we see today, how would it work? Current systems almost seem to have a tendency to "breed" the types of malevolent, inefficient, greedy and problematic power structures we see. I think that at the root of the problem are natural human flaws. It seems almost certain that given enough time, no matter how well intentioned people are, the cumulative effect of our natural flaws inevitably evolves the kind of system/culture that attracts and perpetuates these flawed tendencies. I think the process could be compared to natural selection. Has anyone thought about it like that? I'm curious. Is it possible to design a system of government which would not be influenced by inherent human flaws? A system which, by design, has a tendency to "select" characteristics that shape it to be more beneficial, free from its current flaws?

Qantourisc 11y ago
Pick 30 random people and replace them every 3 months. The new laws have to be voted on by either a referendum or a large random draft (1000 people) (which are also often replaced). Problems are: keeping the random random. People in general making immature decision, like lowering the taxes.
- adrianN 11y ago
  Good luck implementing anything that takes longer than three months to bear fruit.
monort 11y ago
Remove a government monopoly and solve the problem with competition: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polycentric_law https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polycentric_law
ionised 11y ago
Some form of sortition probably; https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sortition https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sortition Basically treat political office as a civic duty, much like jury duty. Give them a very generous salary and have a maximum term after which they can never be reinstated. Also ban completely any form of financial lobbying.

acd 11y ago

I think that the Japan public debt house is starting to crackle and they do not want the public to know. Thus they are silencing the media. Here is a graph of Japanese debt to GDP ratio http://www.tradingeconomics.com/japan/government-debt-to-gdp http://www.tradingeconomics.com/japan/government-debt-to-gdp Here is demographic Changes in Japan's population. It shows a top slope, population starting to fall. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_Japan#/media/File:Population_of_Japan_since_1872.svg https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_Japan#/media/F... So a retiring Japanese population is going to pay for rising public debt. Sustainable in the long run?

jld89 11y ago
You forgot to mention that Japan is the biggest creditor in the world and the one that possesses more foreign net assets than even China. So even if debt is colossal, it has the assets to maintain it for a long time.