15 ms·
Emperor Akihito of Japan Raises Possibility of Leaving Throne
- caminante 10y ago“I am concerned that it will become more and more difficult for me to fulfill my duties as a symbolic emperor” This sounds like the opening or the punchline for a Dilbert strip!
- hrktb 10y agoI see how it can sound ridiculous if we take "symbolic" into any other context. But in this case the symbolic part is a really big deal, just as the pope has a symbolic role that affects a ton of people.
- ajuc 10y agoPope can actually make decisions with consequences.
- geuis 10y agoThere is a big difference though. The power of the Pope has been restricted over a period of centuries. The power of the Emperor of Japan has only been restricted for about 70 years. At this point, neither party can really "make decisions with consequence", especially the Pope. They can mutually make declarations, and people may or may not respond to them. In that regard, they are as equally weak as all of the various monarchies of Europe and Southeast Asia. However, Japan is fairly unique in this set of players. They have a highly homogenized population and culture. The changes to their cultural leadership are only 70 years old. When I visited there in 2010, I left with a feeling that I visited a sleeping country/culture that was literally missing some polarizing goal to reignite it. That doesn't necessarily mean warlike, but it does mean ambitious. Don't be quick to think of Japan as some tamed tiger or lion. It definitely is not.
- TeMPOraL 10y ago> When I visited there in 2010, I left with a feeling that I visited a sleeping country/culture that was literally missing some polarizing goal to reignite it. Isn't this similar to the whole Western world? I mean, my impression of modern democracies I know is they're similar to headless chickens - running around without a point or a goal, but oh how fast they run. EDIT: to be clear, I'm not criticizing democracy here per se, this is my observation about the Western societies. I understand it's not the role of a government to dictate a goal for people - it's to facilitate pursuing goals in a stable and orderly manner. But wouldn't it be nice if our societies had at least a little bit more of a sense of common purpose?
- kiba 10y agoIt is the western democracies' various unelected professional bureaucracy that keep those democracies working, however imperfect those organizations are. Let not pretend that a democracy is a great way to choose people for office. It's a terrible way, but I am not sure how one would do better.
- gkya 10y agoPlato's Politicus has an interesting comparison of different political systems in 302b-303c, putting democracy as basically ineffective, saying a corrupt democracy is the least harmful among corrupt systems, and a good, working democracy is the worst among good, working systems. See the text, starting from: http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Plat.+Stat.+302b&fromdoc=Perseus%3Atext%3A1999.01.0172 http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Plat.+Stat.+302...
- rm_-rf_slash 10y agoIn my interpretation of Western democracies, it is the job of the private sector to make life better for people (if a bit unevenly), whereas it is the job of the state to keep lives from getting worse.
- ptaipale 10y agoYes, the pope can actually make decisions with consequences, but as Stalin put it, "The Pope? How many divisions has he got?" Well, he doesn't have any, the power comes through his symbolic position.
- gonvaled 10y agoStalin was probably undervaluing religious zealotry.
- ptaipale 10y agoYes, though zealotry is perhaps the wrong word here - zealots were a Judean movement that rebelled against the Roman Empire and sought to expel it by force of arms; zealots are associated with violence. Pope's influence has over the recent centuries come over non-violent conviction of followers. Daesh has lots of zealotry, Catholics less so.
- HemanHeartYou 10y ago>though zealotry is perhaps the wrong word here - zealots were a Judean movement that rebelled historically you'd be right, by definition you are wrong, zealotry is fanaticism violence may have played a role in the past but times change
- gonvaled 10y agoI meant potential zealotry: Catholics seem to be quite peaceful nowadays, but my opinion is that this is a temporary state of affairs. Religions are totalitarian, since they are the holders of the One Truth.
- akiselev 10y agoI doubt it. The modern Catholic church is fundamentally different from what it was even a century ago. Ever since Pope John XXIII started Vatican II in 1962 and it reached its conclusion in 1965, the church has completely reformed almost every area of its existence including political influence, missionary work, it's relationship with other religions and governments, and even its core liturgy. Ever since then, there has been a huge gulf between most Catholics and the conservative branch of the Church, the extremists who would normally go to war but now have little power.
- afandian 10y agoThey only have consequences because enough people imbue the symbol with significance.
- ajuc 10y agoHe's a CEO of an organization with more than 400 000 people in middle management (priests) alone (and they have to listen to his orders or lose their status or even be sued before a special court). He can make state decisions (small state, but still). Not comparable to strictly ceremonial function of Japan's emperor.
- afandian 10y agoThings like state decisions are direct but limited. But decisions like the Roman Catholic Church's policy on contraception has only devastated as many lives as it has because those people choose to believe in the symbol.
- OtterCoder 10y agoBut, all power is, at its root, symbolic. Stalin only slaughtered as many as he did because people believed in the symbolic power of the state and in him as having some right to lead such an abstract entity with total authority.
- afandian 10y agoNot all power. The Pope, Stalin and the Emperor have the symbolic power to a greater or lesser extent. The soldier aiming a gun at you or healthcare professional denying you access to contraception on the say-so of one of the above does have real power.
- OtterCoder 10y agoExcellent point. I suppose I was speaking to power structures, specifically, rather than power in the sense of personal ability. In the end, however, if you want to have power on the scale of civilizations, some, if not most of that power must be symbolic in nature. There's no way to hold a knife to a nation's throat for the long haul without at least a little loyal help.
- paol 10y agoNot a very good parallel. The pope has real power in a large organization with genuine real world influence. (Not nearly as much influence as it used to have, but still.)
- rmc 10y agoThe Pope does not have a symbolic power over the Roman Catholic Church.
- lovart 10y agoDoes anyone know how much of the 2,700 year 'official genealogy' is credible?
- twblalock 10y agoNot a lot of it. Before the 6th century AD, things get very murky, and belong more to the discipline of archaeology than to history. Aside from some nutty right-wingers, the Japanese are not under any illusions about this.
- BurningFrog 10y agoThat's still 1500 years.
- twblalock 10y agoIt is very long. It gets a little bit murky in the 1300s because there were rival claimants to the throne, but they were all related to each other. It's very likely that the dynasty has been in the same family since the 6th century. Some historians think some of the early emperors might have been unrelated to their predecessors, but even those emperors reigned during or before the 6th century. The throne was not always passed from father to son, but sometimes among close relatives, which means that an emperors lack of children was not a problem for the continuation of the dynasty. Furthermore, emperors have been figureheads for most of Japanese history, so there was no significant benefit to usurping the throne as there was in Europe. People who wanted to control the country wanted to be the emperor's advisers, and later the shogun.
- justusw 10y agoEven better: There is even some Korean ancestry mixed into the genetic stew (https://www.theguardian.com/world/2001/dec/28/japan.worlddispatch https://www.theguardian.com/world/2001/dec/28/japan.worlddis...) Luckily, the state-worship of the emperor as a descendant of Amaterasu and Jimmu has been abolished after Hirohito declined being divine after WWII. Maybe now is a good time to take this one step further and to abolish the monarchy once and for all?
- moogly 10y agoI propose a deal: Let the man rest in exchange for the abolishment of the constitutional monarchy. Symbolic or not, it's outmoded and incongruent with modern egalitarian society. The list of constitutional monarchies is rather embarrassingly long (37 countries).
- kome 10y agoay-men
- twblalock 10y agoThe problem with replacing constitutional monarchs is that they know their place, but the heads of state who would replace them might not. After all, they are likely to be elected, and could therefore have a viable claim to legitimacy in the exercise of their prerogatives. The Japanese emperor has no political power, and really doesn't cost the country that much to keep around. Remember that in parliamentary systems, the head of state and the head of government (the prime minister) are not the same person. In some countries, like Germany and Italy, the head of state is an elected president, usually an fairly elderly politician. The emperor of Japan would have to be replaced as head of state by someone holding some new office, who would do pretty much the same things the emperor does now, at a similar cost to the taxpayer. It wouldn't be the prime minister. There is a similar aspect to the debate around House of Lords reform in the UK. A lot of people in the House of Commons don't want an elected House of Lords, because if it were elected, the Lords would have democratic legitimacy just as the Commons does, and could therefore make a reasonable case that it should have a lot more political power than it has now. So, beware of unintended consequences.
- moogly 10y agoPlenty of nations have successfully abolished constitutional monarchy in the past couple of hundred years. The role and political power of the head of state (be it Prime Minister/Chancellor or President, or a combination — doesn't matter) should be well-defined in the constutition (which of course needs changing). I don't really see any loopholes here... I find that argument to be a red herring. As you say, in some countries, the official (purely symbolic) head of state has no real power (pointless in other words). That's OK-ish. I'd rather not have a symbolic president. But the main point is to not make the position hereditary. Germany's president, whilst largely ceremonial, actually has some (residual) power by the way, but it's a 5-year term. Not elected by the people, however, which is a shame. For example, Finland's president is.
- gfodor 10y agoI find it bizarre that Japan is having an contentious debate about if it's appropriate for a woman to ascend to a completely powerless role while the US just nominated its first (viable) female candidate for president. edit: Wow, apparently this is an offensive comment. I'm having a hard time twisting my brain to see how, but my point was simply that the it seems odd that there would be contention over a powerless role for a woman in any part of the world when (arguably) the most powerful political position that exists today has a female candidate. One would think that if the latter is true the former could not be. edit 2: Oh, I think I get it. Posters are assuming I'm American and am boasting about how progressive my country is. Huh. Nope, that wasn't what I was doing. (Though I am American, and not voting for either mainstream candidate.)
- sspiff 10y agoThe president of the united states is arguably also a powerless, symbolic role.
- gozur88 10y agoNo it isn't. The president of the US has a lot of power. More than the framers of the government allotted to the office.
- tonyedgecombe 10y agoand yet they find it surprisingly difficult yo make things happen.
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]
- gozur88 10y agoWhat they say they want and what they really want are sometimes two different things.
- CamperBob2 10y ago
- stuaxo 10y agoThen maybe Britains Queen could resign, she looks like she's eaten a wasp whenever she appears in public or on TV.
- InclinedPlane 10y agoHave you been following what's been happening in British politics lately? Eating a wasp would be a step up.
- ptaipale 10y agoElizabeth II is 90 years old. I think she looks remarkably vital for a person so old and presumably not without pressures in her official role, even if largely invisible to the outside world.
- smcl 10y agoI'm not a fan of the monarchy by any stretch of the imagination, but "the old lady looks bad" is not really a particularly persuasive argument
- dmichulke 10y agoMy take - the emperor is well educated and knows what's coming. Continuous tensions with China, printing money for some 35 years now (correct me if I'm wrong), a demography that's unsustainable, a treasury and stock market controlled by the central bank, ... 1920s/30s all over again with first a collapse of the yen and later on a war to distract the blame from the failed monetary policy and funnel the anger into some nationalist ideology. I certainly can't blame him for not wanting to take part in that.
- OedipusRex 10y agoA war with who?
- ptaipale 10y agoI think I have a better explanation: he's 82 years old. If he's not in exceptionally good shape, the job of a formal head of state may be too much even in smooth times. Japan has been printing money and economy has tanked for 35 years, but still life is good for the Japanese.
- erikb 10y agoHaven't read much about Japan. But I'm quite sure that China is looking for someone to make a war with and they still have some grudges with Japan. If Japan on the other side is also heading in the direction of war there may really something happen. That's worrysome.
- Hitard 10y agoNobody wants war in Asia. The question is how and at what rate the United States withdraws from its ultimately unsustainable position as pacific hegemon. China would like it to happen sooner. Most of the rest of Asia would like it to happen later, and to share more equitably in a post-american security coalition. To make that possible, Japan and South Korea may need to show more strategic solidarity in the short term.
- erikb 10y ago
- hristov 10y agoOne interesting factoid that the new york times did not mention is that while it was common for emperors to resign before the meiji restoration, a lot of those resignations probably were not voluntary. The Japanese emperors are the longest reigning royal dynasty in the world, having reigned for the entire known history of the nation. But perhaps heir secret is that they did not have much power most of the time. During the time of the shoguns and even before that it was common to force an emperor to resign before he reaches adulthood so as to ensure that there was a child emperor on the throne at all times. A child emperor of course is unlikely to use his position to seize power. The Meiji restoration was a revolution whose stated goal was to restore the power to the emperor. Perhaps it was in view of that goal and the history of forced resignatons that they made a law that did not even give the emperor the option to resign. However, I am not certain whether the present emperor for life law dates back to the meiji restoration. Or perhaps they put the law in after WW2 to ensure that foreign governments do not mess with the emperors.
- twblalock 10y agoThe modern imperial household law was introduced in the late 19th century, in order to emulate similar laws in Europe. It was amended after WWII, but law regarding abdication/resignation was left unchanged.
- anabis 10y agoThere are also examples of retired Emperors (上皇, 法皇) wielding power. That is part of the reason why they now reign for life.
- timje1 10y agoQuick FYI - factoid: a false fact that is repeated often enough to become accepted as true.
- cgriswald 10y agoYour little factoid is an example of the definition of factoid you're describing. But there are other definitions of factoid and I suspect the most common one is along the lines "small tidbit of information".
- timwaagh 10y agoThey should let him step down. They should have changed that law ages ago. Japans politicians should be ashamed they did not. Whether or not Japan wants to be a constitutional monarchy or not is of course their matter. But if you consider what is happening right now in Turkey and Russia, the argument against constitutional monarchy seems really thin.
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]
- brandelune 10y agoThe buzz in Japan is not so much about the resignation itself but about the timing: exactly when Abe is strong enough to modify the constitution. It is said that the Emperor is trying to slow the constitutional change by first pressing a change that would allow him to resign.
- anabis 10y agoI don't think that is the case. http://www.usnews.com/news/entertainment/articles/2016-08-06/after-shock-japan-warms-up-to-emperors-possible-abdication http://www.usnews.com/news/entertainment/articles/2016-08-06... > The quiet discussion reportedly started about five years ago, around the time he had health problems This is before Abe became PM. From this, I think the people who don't want to change the constitution is using the Emperor politically.
- known 10y agoFirst reported in banner headlines by the Japanese news media in July, Akihito, who has been treated for cancer and heart problems, wants to pass the title to his son Crown Prince Naruhito, 56.