THAT DIDN’T TAKE LONG. Jiji Press, a Japanese wire service, revealed on 18 December the results of its latest political poll. It shows that the approval rate for the Hatoyama Cabinet has fallen below 50% for the first time to hit 46.8%–a 7.6 percentage-point drop from last month’s survey. That wasn’t all the bad news for the DPJ, either; the Cabinet’s disapproval rate climbed five percentage points to 30.3%.

Considering that the Cabinet’s approval rate was roughly 72%-73% immediately after being sworn in, the new numbers show that one-third of its support has evaporated in a mere three months.

An approval rate north of 70% is impossible for most politicians to maintain for very long, but the plummeting poll numbers demonstrate that the electorate is quickly losing patience with the Boy Prime Minister and Amateur Hour at Nagata-cho. To be sure, the new Government was skating on thin ice to begin with—while its initial favorability rating might have been a kilometer wide, it was only a centimeter deep. The voters turned to the Democratic Party of Japan not because it thought them capable of serious reform and competent governance, but because they had finally thrown their hands up in exasperated disgust at the performance of the Liberal Democratic Party, particularly during the post-Koizumi period.

A breakdown of the poll numbers is quite instructive. Here are the two reasons most frequently cited by those who support the Government:

* Good policies: 14.4% (down 3.7 points)
* There are no other suitable people: 14.0%

In other words, one of the main reasons for the support they do receive is, as the Japanese might say, neko yori mashi–it’s better than a cat (it’s better than nothing).

Here are the reasons cited by those who do not support the Government:

* No expectations for them: 15.3% (up 4.5 points)
* No leadership: 14.5% (up 10.2 points to triple in value in one month)
* Can’t trust the prime minister: 9.0% (up 2.1 points)
* Bad policies: 8.9% (down 0.2 point)

They’re not yet in any danger of being overtaken by the opposition Liberal Democratic Party, if only because the latter group is still groggy and rolling on the mat after its August defeat. When asked which party they support, the respondents said:

* Democratic Party: 25.0% (down 3.4 points)
* Liberal Democratic Party: 15.6% (up 0.3 point)

But here’s the most interesting answer by far to that question:

* Do not support any party: 51.7%

That’s the first time in four months the figure has surpassed 50%. It means a capital opportunity still lies there for the taking by a group of enterprising, gutsy politicians capable of following through on a well-presented plan and acting as if their primary purpose was something other than to avoid criticism from the public, the media, and the bureaucracy to hang on until the upper house election. But don’t be putting in a call for Diogenes and his lantern—it’ll take more than that to find a handful of that breed.

Who’s in charge here?

It’s not surprising that people just aren’t impressed with Hatoyama Yukio—they don’t see any leadership skills, and they don’t trust him. Rather, it was to be expected. He’s never demonstrated anything remotely resembling public leadership skills in his political life, so it’s not as if he was going to find an express-delivered package full of them in his mailbox on the morning of 1 September. If they were that easy to obtain, his mother would have bought them for him long ago.

That leads us to another unsurprising finding. Jiji also asked the respondents who they thought was in real control of the Hatoyama Cabinet. Here are the answers:

* Ozawa Ichiro (party secretary-general): 71.1%
* Hatoyama Yukio: 10.6%

Not even close, is it?

All the other possibilities on the list were selected by fewer than 3% of the respondents, while 11.5% said they didn’t know.

In other words, most people in Japan consider this to be the Ozawa administration rather than the Hatoyama administration. That would go a long way to explaining why the Cabinet’s approval rate is taking on water faster than the DPJ can bail it out. The only time all year the LDP led in the generic polls was the period extending from the arrest of Mr. Ozawa’s chief aide for accepting kickbacks from a construction company until Mr. Ozawa finally resigned the party presidency. They didn’t want an Ozawa administration, and now they’re starting to think they’ve got one anyway.

Arrogant drama queen

People have always considered Mr. Ozawa to be an arrogant cuss with a taste for drama, and that arrogance has been increasingly evident to the public in the past month. His attitude also exacerbates the perception that his conduct of affairs incorporates the worst aspects of LDP machine politics, particularly when his patron Tanaka Kakuei was the Big Enchilada.

There are as many reasons for this perception as there are playing cards in a deck, but perhaps an article that appeared in the 16 December edition of the Mainichi Shimbun encapsulates the most obvious of them.

On that day, Mr. Ozawa held a meeting at party headquarters to present to the Government his “important demands” for next year’s budget. According to the newspaper’s sources, Mr. Ozawa’s attitude turned Arctic and his tone became sharp as soon as the media left the room following their photo opportunity.

Asked Mr. Ozawa:

“I doubt whether (the budget) was formulated under political leadership…Did you put together this budget without the bureaucracy getting involved? I want government officials to study the issues, make decisions, and execute them.”

Remember—he is the head of the party, not the head of the Government, and he was addressing the party members in the Government.

He added:

“You might be too carefully responding to the (industry) groups that were closely allied with the LDP governments. We formed a Cabinet because we won the election.”

And concluded:

“I’ve assumed the role of the person whom everyone hates because I say what somebody has to say.”

He’s got that first part right. There may be no politician anywhere more disliked by his own party than Mr. Ozawa, but the DPJ put up with him because he was the only one capable of holding their incompatible elements together long enough to teach them how to win elections Tanaka style.

The Mainichi article concluded by saying that Prime Minister Hatoyama was present at the meeting and took notes.

At least he didn’t hire a stenographer to do it for him.

The question of Mr. Ozawa’s influence arose during a media briefing with Chief Cabinet Secretary Hirano Hirofumi on the 18th. When asked what he thought of the view that the party secretary-general was really running the show, Mr. Hirano replied:

“The Cabinet is operating under Prime Minister Hatoyama Yukio’s leadership. Any other idea is a distortion. This Government exists because of the strong backing of the party. The party president is the prime minister, and Secretary-General Ozawa is giving strong support to the party.”

You didn’t expect him to tell the truth, now did you?

Here’s one more question from the Jiji poll. When the subjects were asked whether they thought the DPJ had disassociated itself from the bureaucracy and instituted rule by the political class, 50.6% of the respondents said they had not, and only 26.3% said they had. That’s an increase of 3.7 percentage points among the nay-sayers in the past month.

In fact, someone very clever at Jiji inserted an interesting potential answer when asking about the most important person in the Government. To a list that included Messrs. Hatoyama, Ozawa, Kamei, Kan, and Okada, that person also slipped in the Finance Ministry.

A total of 0.6% of the respondents thought they were in charge, edging out Land, Infrastructure, and Transport Minister Maehara Seiji at 0.5%, and Foreign Minister Okada Katsuya at 0.4%.

Still the same old Kasumigaseki

The public has good reason to think the Hatoyama administration is still under the thumb of the bureaucracy in general and the Finance Ministry in particular. The following is an excerpt of a roundtable discussion among representatives of Japanese government ministries that appeared in the 17 October issue of the weekly Shukan Gendai. They were discussing the dog-and-pony show held in a Tokyo gym to make determinations on the continuation of certain government programs and the elimination of government waste. (The DPJ showed that it learned one lesson about theater from Mr. Koizumi. The exercise was more about humiliating officials from the lesser ministries than having anything to with real government.)

METI stands for Ministry of Economy, Trade, and Industry, MOF for Ministry of Finance, MIAC for the Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communications, and CO for Cabinet Office.

METI: In fact, the Finance Ministry is not acting recklessly and is not out of control. The head of the secretariat of the Governmental Reform Council is Kato Hideki, the head of a non-profit think tank.

MIAC: He’s a Finance Ministry alumnus (hired in 1973) that devised the methods for the operational review to remove waste from government.

METI: That’s right. That project was done using statistics from the Budget Bureau. In other words, Mr. Kato and the Finance Ministry are as one. The personnel decision that put him in charge of the project was made by Deputy Prime Minister Matsui Koji (Note: He’s actually deputy chief cabinet secretary, but the man from METI was repeating a common joke). That’s because the DPJ’s primary objective is to maintain control of the government until the upper house election. He thinks the most important factor in maintaining control is to not alienate the Finance Ministry.

CO: The Finance Ministry can be frightening when it’s aroused, can’t it? Eda Kenji (of Your Party), an aide to former Prime Minister Hashimoto Ryutaro, testified that immediately after Hashimoto told the MOF of his decision to spin off the Finance Department into a separate agency, it was leaked to the press that Yamaichi Securities had gone bankrupt. That was followed by an unprecedented credit crunch. The administration was trounced in the upper house election, and the Cabinet resigned. When it comes to protecting its own organization, The MOF has no qualms about crushing a Cabinet.

MOF: No comment.

The electorate voted for the DPJ in the hope of finding decisive leadership, competent governance that puts the people’s interests first, the disassociation of politics from the bureaucracy, and the renunciation of the money politics of the past and the people who its visible symbols.

One of these decades, they might actually get it.

Afterwords:

* I attended a seminar in October in Tokyo, and one of the speakers (the head of a small political think-tank) went off-topic briefly to state rather firmly that Mr. Ozawa is waiting for the best time to gather up his supporters and walk out of the party, leaving the leftist elements of the DPJ behind. He then intends to create a new Government on his own and rule in somewhat the style of former Prime Minister Koizumi, though more odayaka (calm and mild). Reading between the lines in the Japanese print media, most Japanese commentators seem to half-expect this as well, and sometimes events seem to be trending in that direction.

One Japanese journalist recently compared Mr. Ozawa to a powerful chemical agent because he generates a strong reaction when he comes in contact with other people. That reaction is just as often negative as positive. It’s possible he’ll split and form a government of his own, but it’s unlikely that anyone can expect anything odayaka from any enterprise in which he’s involved.

* To his credit, Mr. Ozawa does seem to want to wrest power away from Japan’s civil service. To his detriment, he seems to want to seize that power in his own hands. It’s unfortunate that his personality is more suited to leadership in a single-party dictatorship than a parliamentary democracy.

* Right after Mr. Hatoyama was named party president and it became apparent that he would soon become prime minister, he began sporting a silly new hair style that makes him look like a girl in junior college who knows she isn’t pretty but can’t make up her mind what to do about it.

When a man in his late 60s behaves that way, it’s a dead giveaway he hasn’t got a fully formed personality, and, at his age, never will.

Yes, it wasn’t his fault that he was born into a family with more money than they’ll ever know what to do with, and for that he deserves a bit of slack. But just because he had the opportunity to use that money to buy a political party doesn’t mean the rest of the country should be subjected to his shortcomings.

A COMMON LYRICAL HOMILY in Black American gospel music is the observation that everyone wants to go to heaven, but no one wants to die.

With a slight modification, that would be equally applicable to the Hatoyama administration’s pledge of a 25% reduction in CO2 emissions from 1990 levels by 2020.

Hypersensitive as always to what passes for the conventional wisdom of their brethren in Western countries, the Japanese mass media were thrilled when the self-anointed elites overseas pronounced themselves delighted with Japan’s new policy. After the disappointing 8% reduction pledge from the troglodytes in the Aso administration, this was much more like it. Japan was getting good press, and that’s all the local boys and girls needed to know.

But the Japanese mass media is just as loath as their fellow guild members in the Anglosphere to do any real investigative work and dig into just what those promises would entail. The new promises sounded good, the Amen Corner in the Church of Latter-Day Environmentalist Saints shouted Hallelujah, and the UN–that exemplar of good government–kept pumping out hot air about climate change, so they were down with it.

Besides, it allowed them to return to covering the stories they much prefer, such as the pre-election career of new lower house proportional representation MP and DPJ member Tanaka Mieko. It seems Ms. Tanaka caught some vicarious kicks by dressing up in strange costumes and interviewing women in the sex industry for sleazy magazines. She also appeared topless in the film Blind Beast vs. Killer Dwarf, which gave her the opportunity to display her thespian skills by pretending to enjoy a chest massage from the Blind Beast himself. But I digress.

For starters, the pledge wouldn’t mean a 25% reduction in CO2 emissions from present levels. It would be a reduction from 1990 levels–which means Mr. Hatoyama’s promise involves cutting emissions by 33% in 11 years.

Some Japanese scientists have done the research, and Roger Pielke Jr., a professor of Environmental Studies at the University of Colorado at Boulder, posts some of their findings on his blog.

Before reading what would have to happen, I suggest fortifying yourself with a warming drink first. This will be enough to make your blood run cold. Keep in mind Prof. Pielke’s link is to someone who thinks this is all a wonderful idea.

One wonders whether Taro and Hanako would consider it a wonderful idea if the Government actually kept its promise to solve a “global warming” problem that–thanks to Climategate–we now know doesn’t exist. They’d be put on a forced march through Hell to get to the Promised Land, only to discover that their Green Heaven is just as mythical as the pot of gold at the end of the Rainbow Warrior.

But by then it would be too late. And all the accomplices in governments and their bought researchers would be congratulating themselves for a Mission Accomplished in fantasyland.

Fortunately, governments often don’t keep environmental promises, the Hatoyama administration has backed off its proposed Green Tax for now, and the whole scam of using environmentalism as a stalking horse for global governance might be completely discredited by the time a Japanese government got off its duff. Even the mainstream media has now begun hooting at Al Gore.

Follow the link and then consider how life in Japan would have to change to meet the government’s stated goal. Read also the first commenter’s claims that using photovoltaic arrays in Japan would actually result in greater CO2 generation than less.

Note: The important information is easily available at that site, but the link to more information at the bottom requires a paid subscription. Don’t let that stop you from clicking the link to the post here, however.

A FEW DAYS ago, we had a post about three Westerners who are Gold Card members in good standing of the transnational, global governance jet set that genuflects at the altar of big bureaucracy, big regulation, top-down control, and little liberty. Their view of contemporary Japan, which seems to originate from somewhere in Deep Space, keeps them afloat on the book and lecture circuit and brings in consultation fees to discuss future developments and conduct what they call Multi-Stakeholder Dialogues.

Reader A-nihonjin sends along a Japanese-language article dated 9 December from the Chosun Online website of the South Korean newspaper of the same name. One of the trio, Jean-Pierre Lehmann, gave two talks in Seoul on the 8th. The title of one was, “Will South Korea Play a Central Role in the Age of a Powerful East Asia Soon to Come?”

The article on the site, which is a translation from the Korean of remarks originally in either English or French, quotes Mr. Lehmann as saying:

“There must be mutual trust and uniform thinking to create a unified East Asian region, but both Japan and China are lacking in these areas.”

One wonders how much he charged for telling the South Koreans what they already know—and for not telling the Koreans that the same sentence applies equally to them.

“Despite past discord between France and Germany, they were able to create the EU and lead Europe because they both had democratic systems of government. But the East Asia in which China and Japan are located is different.”

Yes, it is different. Japan is the Northeast Asian pioneer in both democratic government and the (relatively) free market economy. After a period of military dictatorship, South Korea is catching up. Will China ever get there? If they don’t, what would be the point of an East Asian entity?

If there is any discord in this neck of the woods, Japan is the last country at which he should be pointing the finger of blame.

And yes, the Franco-German dominance of the EU is precisely what more than a few Europeans dislike about it.

Here’s what he said about Japan:

“There are a lot of aspects that Japan does not understand, and the country lacks trustworthiness. That was true during the Koizumi era, and I don’t know what’s going to happen in the Hatoyama era.”

Watching a massive edifice of false knowledge ostentatiously being paraded in public is similar to seeing the aftermath of an auto accident. You know it’s going to be ugly, but it’s still difficult to turn your head.

We are told neither what it is that Japan does not understand, nor how he would know what it is Japan does not understand.

That he would not care for Mr. Koizumi is to be expected. The former prime minister was an advocate of deregulation, privatization, smaller government, the devolution of authority, the free market economy, and individual initiative. Those are not the sort of ideas a believer in global governance overseen by a bureaucratic elite would find appealing.

Nor does he explain just what is so sneaky and underhanded about the Japanese. Perhaps he knows just enough to realize that the South Koreans have been so conditioned they will find some way to fill in the blanks for themselves. By mentioning Mr. Koizumi, he is presumably referring to his Yasukuni visits. Is Mr. Lehmann informed enough to realize that the Chinese and South Korean governments make it a matter of public policy to inflame anti-Japanese sentiment, and that they manipulate the mass media to achieve that? Could he look someone in the eye and say the Japanese do anything remotely similar?

About China:

“It has many dictatorial aspects and that sort of history.”

Caution: Geopolitical analyst at work

Therefore:

“In the end, to achieve unity in East Asia, South Korea, which has democratized and achieved economic success, will probably play a central role as a third site that has extricated itself from the struggles of those two countries.”

The unspoken bargain seems to be that he feeds their ego by seducing them with—literally—sweet nothings, and they give him a lot of money in gratitude.

I suspect there’s been a translation error in the next part, and this is perhaps what he was saying (alternate translations welcome):

“In the first year of the next decade of the 21st century (2010), it is possible that the current global governance system will not be capable of presenting solutions for the Doha Development Agenda (Doha Round, the World Trade Organization trade negotiations), sustainable development, and the climate change conference. South Korea, which will host the G20 summit next year, can offer an alternative proposal for a new global governance system.”

Putting aside a clear lack of knowledge about contemporary Northeast Asia compounded by anti-Nipponistic sentiments, Mr. Lehmann’s premise is that large multinational governance structures are a good thing. It should be evident that they are not. They are schemes for transferring money, as well as individual and local rights and privileges, to large bureaucracies, which offer nothing in return. They are to public affairs what pantyhose are to sex. The only beneficiaries are those of the self-anointed political priesthood who have found a niche for themselves somewhere in its superstructure.

Building organizations such as these in smaller units from the ground level up and allowing them to grow organically is the only way to ensure their long-term efficacy, but that model generates few rewards for the bank accounts or vanity of the dirigistes.

One would think there would be a better way of helping promote an East Asian entity than by deliberately sowing the seeds of discord in a speech to one of its potential members. But how else is a European member of the transnational Laputans going to get a piece of that action in this part of the world?

IN THE POST immediately preceding this one, Prof. Shimojo Masao makes a reference to agricultural reform in China and the private ownership of land. He holds that agricultural problems in China will not be solved until land can be privately owned and democratic reforms established.

In one of those serendipitous examples of synchronicity, fewer than 12 hours after posting it, I ran across this article from the Hoover Institute that compares land reform in Russia in the post-Soviet era and in China in the post-Mao era. It is both enlightening and frustrating. On the one hand, it does present a contrast worth considering. On the other, the authors celebrate the wonders of Chinese agrarian reform while glossing over the critical fact that Chinese farmers still cannot own land outright. They offer a vague hope that it might be possible in the future, depending on the way in which a new law passed in 2007 will be implemented.

I understand that academics and intellectuals as well as journalists want to pitch a tent to present a point of view, and create narratives to further that presentation. But why is it so difficult for them to realize the reader needs the basic facts first. They’re not going to find them all here. The curious reader will have to plow through several more articles and sift through several bushels of infotainment before a picture begins to take shape.

That picture contains several scenes the Hoover Institute article doesn’t even hint at–serious anti-governmental unrest in rural areas and a Chinese debate over what degree of private ownershop is necessary.

It will come as no surprise the author of this Time magazine article chose to dramatize government thuggishness–it’s a glossy infotainment mag, after all–but still didn’t manage to get the facts down. (He says land is owned by the state. Chinese farmland is owned by the individual villages.) This recent Financial times article has more information, but still does not present the basic fact about Chinese land ownership.

This Christian Science Monitor article has the same problem. None of these articles, however, make it clear that the Chinese government is still opposed to private ownership. That information is to be found in this piece in the Vancouver Sun.

This summary by the Council on Foreign Relations is much better, but again they have little to say about the new law. (It will allow freeholding rather than outright ownership.) Instead they just provide a link to the English translation of the law itself. Couldn’t they have found the time and space–a clearly written paragraph?–to properly explain, rather than invite the reader to wade through 247 articles of legalese?

Yet again one has to recognize the brilliance of Akutagawa Ryunosuke for his literary montage Rashomon, later turned into a film by Kurosawa Akira that starred Mifune Toshiro. It tells the story of a man’s murder and the rape of his wife from the perspectives of four people. Their accounts differ so greatly the reader or viewer wonders if they are describing the same incident.

That, however, was fiction. How unfortunate that it also describes the state of academic writing and journalism.

IN THE ANGLOSPHERE, a barbed complaint is often heard from people who think they’ve been kept out of the information loop and dealt with as if they’re insignificant ciphers by their governments, employers, or social groups. “They treat me like a mushroom,” the lament goes. “They keep me in the dark and feed me a load of sh*t.”

That expression came to mind after reading this account in the Japanese language press that Environment Minister Ozawa Sakihito wanted to levy a “global warming tax”:

The Environment Minister said he would like to see an amendment to the Environmental Ministry’s tax code for FY 2010. He wants to create a “global warming tax” that levies charges on gasoline, coal, and other fossil fuels to reduce the amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. Mr. Ozawa said he was thinking in terms of JPY 2 trillion in tax revenue. This amount would account for about 80% of the revenue loss stemming from the elimination of the ‘temporary’ gasoline tax. The minister insisted, however, that his idea ‘was not to increase revenue to offset the lost revenue from the gasoline tax.’

The Environmental Ministry envisions a tax of JPY 2,400 per ton of carbon, which would result in JPY 360 billion yen (about $US 4.01 billion) in revenue. The liability for each household would be about JPY 2,000 annually. Based on revenue alone, the minister’s new tax proposal is five times higher than the ministry’s plan.

The funds would be used to promote such measures as building energy-saving homes, expanding the use of solar power generation, and cutting taxes on eco-cars. It would be one of the funding sources for the Hatoyama Cabinet’s proposal to reduce Japan’s greenhouse gas emissions by 25%. Steps would also be taken to ensure the liability would not increase for industries exposed to international competition and those with lower incomes.

As this article points out, what the minister now calls a “green tax” would also double the tax on electricity and more than double the tax on kerosene, still in common use by those in Japan without central heating as fuel for space heaters.

Mr. Ozawa has even greater ambitions. He wants to “exercise leadership” at the international conference on climate change starting on 7 December in Copenhagen to ensure that all parties reach an agreement. Here’s what he said about the Hatoyama Cabinet pledge:

“This reduction target has heightened international momentum to make COP15 a success. I think this is probably one of the greatest contributions Japan has ever made in the field of international issues,” said Ozawa, pointing out that several countries, including South Korea, Brazil, the U.S. and China, announced their reduction targets following Hatoyama’s announcement.

For his part, Mr. Hatoyama is downplaying the immediate adoption of a green tax. He says “more discussion is required”. He has also set the condition that the green tax cannot entirely offset the revenue loss from the gasoline tax. His is a political reason: he wants the voters to feel as if they’ve gotten a tax break under his government.

if Mr. Ozawa, Mr. Hatoyama, and those in the Environmental Ministry who proposed the Environment Tax are serious, it demonstrates that they are ignorant, ill-informed, or have an agenda they don’t want to reveal to the Japanese public. Or any combination of those three, for that matter.

In any event, it means they are unqualified to serve in government.

The cat’s out of the bag forever

Why? Remember that they’re calling it a “global warming tax”. Levying a “global warming tax” on the Japanese for their carbon consumption is akin to taxing non-smokers for cigarette consumption.

There’s no longer any excuse for anyone anywhere to be saying anything like this, much less in the Japanese government, unless they’re unaware that they’re exposing themselves as fools.

The theory that excessive CO2 production is the basis for anthropogenic global warming has been listing badly for some time. Word got out long ago that global warming stopped circa 1998 and hadn’t started again. Even the BBC finally reported it in this article in early October, followed shortly thereafter by this article in Der Spiegel.

In other words, for Japanese third-year high school students, there hasn’t been any global warming since they were pikapika ichinensei. For young adults of about 31 years of age, there hasn’t been any warming since their coming-of-age ceremony.

Since CO2 output rose during those years, how could CO2 cause global warming? Those scientists who thought immediate action was necessary were stumped because they couldn’t account for the decline—using their computer models, anyway.

As those who follow world news on the Internet in English know, however, the whole sorry charade fell apart two weeks ago when someone—probably an insider—leaked 10 years worth of e-mails from the Climate Research Unit of the University of East Anglia in Great Britain. That institution is the primary source of data for the U.N. effort to create a global agreement on reducing greenhouse gases.

Detachment from science rather than scientific detachment

It turns out that the scientists—whose careers and grant money depended on the continuation of the global warming story—knew there was no warming and had purposely looked for “tricks” to use in their calculations to “hide the decline” in global temperature reconstructions to concoct the now infamous–and discredited–”hockey stick” graph. They ignored every rule of scientific method to cook the books and manufacture data that would satisfy the needs of the IPCC by creating an artificial warming trend. They hectored scientific journals to ignore dissenters. They refused to provide the raw data to outside scientists for independent verification. In fact, they’ve now admitted they destroyed all the raw data, even though it had been requested under the Freedom of Information Act.

That means the most important raw temperature data records for the past several decades no longer exist. It is impossible to create a new temperature index from scratch. Had these researchers been employed by a corporation rather than an educational institution, they’d be facing jail time.

As Clive Crook wrote in The Atlantic, “The stink of intellectual corruption is overpowering.”

In an excellent summary of all the thuggish behavior of this cabal, Christopher Booker of the Telegraph calls it “the scientific scandal of a generation”. Considering the plans the environmentalist doomsayers have for the Copenhagen talks, that’s an understatement. Shikha Dalmia, in another excellent summary in Forbes, calls it “perfidy” that is shattering the global warming consensus. Still others are comparing the scientists to those who stage and rig the results of professional wrestling matches.

Up in arms

The effect of the scandal’s exposure has been astonishing, and the repercussions are spreading beyond the scandal itself at warp speed. Two weeks ago, this was not a story at all. The affair has since been dubbed Climategate, and as I write that word now gets 29,600,000 hits on Google—even though Google doesn’t recognize the term in its automatic hint box after it’s been typed in. Odd, is it not?

Heads are beginning to roll. Phil Jones is temporarily no longer the director of CRU. The leader of the Australian opposition Liberal Party, Malcolm Trumbull, lost his position because he insisted on backing Prime Minister Kevin Rudd’s cap-and-trade bill for carbon consumption. The party sacked him, the Australian Senate rejected the bill twice, and now Mr. Rudd may be forced to call an election, perhaps as soon as next March.

Media blackout

The reputation of the mass media has been damaged as irretrievably as that of the scientists. The information on the scandal was disseminated almost entirely through the Internet. Newspapers initially tried to ignore it. Some tried to cover it as a story of e-mail theft, which is comparable to blaming the boy who called out the emperor for having no clothes (and for being overweight, undermuscled, and deficient of masculinity). The comment sections of those website articles were flooded by people writing in demanding to know why the newspapers weren’t doing their job.

The New York Times had a story about it, but refused to discuss the content of the e-mails because they said it was private information. What they didn’t say was that their Environmental Editor had been exchanging e-mails with the scientists of the CRU and knew what they were up to.

This has changed somewhat, but the story is still being covered only grudgingly in the print media. In the United States, the three major television networks had not, as of Wednesday, broadcast any reports on the story at all. In Canada, one enterprising man had to resort to this to get on CBC TV.

Yet a poll has discovered that 49% of Americans are following the story either very closely or somewhat closely—all without the help of the mass media.

To be sure, the lack of coverage is understandable. Just as one could not expect politicized university professors after the collapse of Communism in Europe to walk from the Che Guevara Memorial Faculty Lounge into their classrooms and apologize to their students because everything they’d been telling them for the past several decades was full of crap, one cannot expect journalists who wouldn’t know a computer model for climate change from a video game to admit their faces are covered in a barnyard of eggs because they colluded in the deceit.

On the other hand, we all know that if it were a story about a multinational corporation covering up scientific evidence of harmful global warming, they’d be all over it like flies on stink.

Follow the money

The world also now knows what else is really going on, because it isn’t just the lack of global warming. The Der Spiegel article above puts it succinctly—billions of Euros are at stake.

The people who cobbled together the Copenhagen treaty envision massive monetary transfers from the developed countries to the lesser developed countries. According to the Guardian:

Industrialists, financiers, bankers, business groups and carbon traders know there is much more in play at the Danish capital than a concern for the health of the planet. They all have a stake in the decisions made and see climate change as the driver of a global energy revolution and the chance to trade in technologies that could shift the world economy.

But developing countries on the frontline of global warming say it is not just money at stake in Copenhagen – it is the survival of their people. Their negotiators are holding out for at least $400bn a year by 2020, and more later. They have already won the argument that they should be compensated for damage caused by the carbon emitted as developed nations grew rich.

It remains to be seen whether they have actually won that argument.

In fact, page 122 of the treaty has this clause:

“[[Developed [and developing] countries] [Developed and developing country Parties] [All Parties] [shall] [should]:]
(a) Compensate for damage to the LDCs’ (least developed countries) economy and also compensate for lost opportunities, resources, lives, land and dignity, as many will become environmental refugees…”

Are the nations who built the modern world supposed to fork over money to those who did nothing to buy off their dignity?

There’ll be some changes made

Another objective of Copenhagen is to drastically alter the conduct of modern life in the developed world:

“…a British parliamentary committee proposed that every citizen be required to carry a carbon card that must be presented, under penalty of law, when buying gasoline, taking an airplane or using electricity. The card contains your yearly carbon ration to be drawn down with every purchase, every trip, every swipe.”

Here’s what Dr. Rajendra Pachauri, the chair of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change wants to do:

Rajendra Pachauri, the chair of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), warned that western society must undergo a radical value shift if the worst effects of climate change were to be avoided. A new value system of “sustainable consumption” was now urgently required, he said.

Hotel guests should have their electricity monitored; hefty aviation taxes should be introduced to deter people from flying; and iced water in restaurants should be curtailed, the world’s leading climate scientist has told the Observer.

That is the same Dr. Rajendra Pachauri who:

…flew at least 443,243 miles on IPCC business in this 19 month period. This business included honorary degree ceremonies, a book launch and a Brookings Institute dinner, the latter involving a flight of 3500 miles…So strong is his love for cricket that his colleagues recall the time the Nobel winner took a break during a seminar in New York and flew in to Delhi over the weekend to attend a practice session for a match before flying back. Again, he flew in for a day, just to play that match.

Global governance

Also at issue is what some people are calling “global governance”. One of them is the new President of the European Union, Herman Van Rompuy. In this video, he calls 2009 “the first year of global governance”, and goes on to say that the Copenhagen meeting will help bring that about. He is echoed by UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon, who has also decided he is one of the wise men of the world. He claims in this platform provided for him by the New York Times that, “All agree that climate change is an existential threat to humankind,” and then notifies us that, “A deal must include an equitable global governance structure. All countries must have a voice in how resources are deployed and managed.”

As the folksinger Woodie Guthrie once observed, some men rob you with a six-gun, and some with a fountain pen.

In fact, the draft of the Copenhagen Treaty contains this section:

“The scheme for the new institutional arrangement under the Convention will be based on three basic pillars: government; facilitative mechanism; and financial mechanism, and the basic organization of which will include the following:
(a) The government will be ruled by the COP with the support of a new subsidiary body on adaptation, and of an Executive Board responsible for the management of the new funds and the related facilitative processes and bodies. The current Convention secretariat will operate as such, as appropriate.”

By government they mean an administrative body rather than world government, but who can doubt that is the eventual goal. For example, the treaty also contains this phrase:

“Establishing the rule of law through means and processes for enforcement.”

And how do they expect to justify this to the regular folks while Dr. Pachauri is jetting off to play cricket for a day and the rest of the elitist swells reach into your wallet to pay for someone else’s dignity with your cash? They’re going to turn environmentalism into a religion. As Mark Halle wrote in this paper from the International Institute of Sustainable Development:

The environment should compete with religion as the only compelling, value-based narrative available to humanity.

Whatever that means…

Meanwhile, back in Japan

What do Japanese think about these issues while a popular revolution is being waged on the other side of the world that its own government is willfully ignoring?

Based on the assumption that the Anglia of East Anglia would be in any news reports, I plugged in the katakana version of the name into the Japanese Google News search. A total of three hits came up: One from Bloomberg Japan, one from Nikkei Pasokon (a computer magazine!), and one from AFPBB News, just a half-hour ago—two weeks after the story broke.

Plugging the katakana version of Climategate according to the Nikkei spelling into Google News picks up one more hit, this one from Slashdot News. Putting the same Climategate into Google Japan picks up about 10,000 hits, far below the nearly 30 million hits in English. The only news outlet hit on the first three pages was for Newsweek Japan.

Nothing from the Yomiuri.
Nothing from the Asahi.
Nothing from the Nikkei.
Nothing from the Mainichi.
Nothing from the Sankei.
In fact, nothing from any daily newspaper at all.

I did read a Japanese-language Mainichi story about the defeat of the carbon tax legislation in the Australian Senate. It didn’t mention the scandal, despite that being a critical element in the story.

My wife said she heard about it on TV once, but very little detail was included.

In the West, the soi-disant elites of Big Government have colluded with Big Science and Big Media to whip up hysteria about a bogus global warming crisis to allow them to establish a system of global governance under their green thumbs, undertake a massive scheme to redistribute the planet’s wealth from the producers to the non-productive, and to make environmentalism the opiate of the masses. When called on it, some responded as if those who objected were either morally or intellectually defective. Others behaved as if they couldn’t detect the rancid smell of flatulence in the room.

What else can one expect from people who think so much of themselves and so little of the hoi polloi?

But, thanks to the Internet, their cover has been blown and a full-scale revolt is underway. It is indeed a revolution every bit as much as the one in the United States in 1776 or Russia in 1917. One of the most important events of our lifetime is happening right now.

How can the Japanese media not cover it?

For that matter, how can the Hatoyama Administration pretend they need to tax something that’s not happening?

In the pre-war days, Japanese used to worry about missing the geopolitical bus. Now they’re missing another bus—the bus of worldwide popular revolt because some people with a misplaced superiority complex as unpleasant as they are ignorant decided they were smart enough to pull the wool over everyone’s eyes in the service of global governance and the religion of environmentalism.

Instead, the haribote prime minister and his Cabinet are going to make everyone pay through the nose to board a different bus without telling anyone that it’s coming.

And the Japanese media ain’t printing any schedules.

But the Japanese will find out, sooner rather than later.

When they do, how will they feel when they realize that their government and mass media consider them to be mushrooms?

Afterwords:

* This previous post on Japanese eco-skepticism has the following quote from Dr. Akasofu Shun’ichi, Professor Emeritus of the University of Alaska and Founding Director of the International Arctic Research Center:

“When people come to know the truth, they will feel deceived by science and scientists.”

His prediction has come true in the West, but not quite yet in Japan. He’s written a Japanese-language article for the December issue of Voice that’s on newsstands now. (The headline reads that global warming stopped in 2000.) Considering publication schedules, it had to have been written at least a month before the scandal broke. If you don’t want to buy the magazine, you can always do a tachiyomi.

* A haribote is a papier-mache stage property.

* Yes, I know that the heat island effect may contribute to a general warming, whenever it last occurred.

* Take a good look at EU President Herman Van Rompuy in that video. I mean, LOOK at the man.

These are the sort of people who think they know how we should best live our lives?

Good God Almighty!

UPDATE:

Christopher Essex, Professor and Associate Chair of the Department of Applied Mathematics at the University of Western Ontario, wrote a letter to a Wall Street Journal columnist that is essential reading. I quote:

Many of we scientists have been ringing the alarm bells from the beginning on this. We have been telling everyone who would listen about who we were dealing with. We have known all along.

Climategate is no surprise at all to us….

A milestone in this mess can be said to be when John Houghton of the IPCC said it was the IPCC’s job to “orchestrate” the views of science. Everything that has happened flows as an inevitable consequence of that.

Some important research fields have been “orchestrated” out of existence. Even before Climategate, I have been saying that we have set ourselves back a generation by taking the money from governments with so many strings attached.

Governments leaders wanted something where they could absolve themselves of the responsibility for making informed decisions. They would have to read science stuff otherwise. They ordered up a kind of unnatural scientist that would tell them precisely what they wanted to hear.

But they gave the puppeteers clubs to deal with those of us who remained true. And the perps of Climategate are what they got. All of my colleagues have had to endure these bullies and criminals for a very long time.

You should understand that (real) scientists have had to pay the heaviest price for the creation of these monsters for decades. And they were not created by us.

Here’s the link to the full letter.

And, as Shakespeare said, the daintiest last, to make the end most sweet: The Japan Times published on 7 December some filler by staff writer Kamiya Setsuko that starts:

Industrialization in the 19th century brought many of the benefits we enjoy in the modern world, changing the structure of society, industry and economy. But nearly two centuries later, one of the downsides of the Industrial Revolution is gaining more attention: global warming.

Not a day goes by without headlines on the threat posed by greenhouse gas emissions — a new report on the consequences of global warning, updates on the prospects for the United Nations COP15 conference on climate change from Dec. 7 to 18.

A closer look at the history of the biggest-ever international conference on climate change shows just how difficult a task it will be for U.N. member states to sign a binding agreement to curb greenhouse gas emissions, despite universal agreement on the need to fight global warming.

Surely they jest, your response might be.

Well, why shouldn’t they? The newspaper is a joke to begin with.

TAKENAKA HEIZO, the privatization and economics guru during the administration of former Prime Minister Koizumi Jun’ichiro, has been one of the favorite whipping boys of the Democratic Party of Japan, now in control of government. Mr. Takenaka is no shrinking wallflower, however, and gives as good as he gets. This interview appeared in today’s Nishinippon Shimbun.

*****
- How do you view the reevaluation of the Japan Post privatization?

They’re turning back the hands of the clock more than 10 years. I want them to stop all of it. If they go through with it, it will boomerang and the people will wind up paying the bill.

- How will the people pay?

To begin with, it is just unbelievable that 80% of the JPY 200 trillion (about $US 2.3 billion) in deposits in the Japan Post savings accounts is used to purchase government bonds. If the bond price falls, we’re looking at the potential for trillions of yen in losses.

Another problem is the obligation to provide uniform services nationwide apart from the applications of the Bank Law. The government will hold the stock, and the amakudari bureaucrats (i.e., former officials in government ministries) will be in control. It will mean the restoration of the government investment and loan practices of the past, and there will also be a large amount of non-performing debt (held by financial institutions). It’s likely to be oyakata hinomaru management done by halves.

(Note: An oyakata is a master, foreman, gang boss, or head of a sumo stable. Hinomaru is the name commonly used for the flag of Japan with a red circle (sun) on a white background. I think that provides a better idea of the meaning of the phrase than an artificial translation. Mr. Takenaka also used the term chutohampa, meaning “by halves”. The closest English equivalent in meaning to that phrase is “half-assed”, but the Japanese original isn’t as crude.)

- Some say that privatization will cause a decline in services in sparsely populated areas.

There were many advantages in linking the ATMs of Japan Post banks and private sector banks. While there are one or two inconveniences, there were 100 or 200 improvements in convenience.

The typical argument is that postal delivery workers can no longer accept money for savings account deposits. But that rule was put in place because it’s an appropriate service regulation. If (that service) were necessary, it can be provided for a fee.

- Do you think the reevaluation of privatization is the popular will?

Probably. That’s the government the people chose, so now they have to be prepared for their liabilities to increase.

- Kamei Shizuka (current Financial Services Minister and Minister for Japan Post Reform) has proclaimed his fiscal policy will be a reversal of the Koizumi-Takenaka course.

It’s not clear what he means. The bill that was finally passed for enhancing SMB financing is different from what Mr. Kamei initially proposed. It’s just an extension and rehash of existing financing measures, and it won’t solve the problem. When I was Financial Services Minister, we also revised the inspection manual to enhance SMB financing.

- What do you think of the Hatoyama Administration’s financial policies?

I don’t understand the overall direction, including how they’re going to establish the growth rate. They’ve got a two-layered Cabinet, with a reformer such as Maehara (Seiji, Minister of Land, Infrastructure, and Transport) on the one hand, and Mr. Kamei on the other. Their National Strategy Office (under Kan Naoto) isn’t functioning. The policies that are needed are the obvious ones—deregulation and a reduction in corporate taxes. Their child-rearing allowance will not contribute to economic growth.

FOR A MAN who’s the head of a splinter party with a mere handful of Diet seats, Kamei Shizuka speaks loudly and carries a big stick in the current Democratic Party of Japan-led government. He’s driving the process to renationalize Japan Post and to enact a measure allowing small and medium-sized businesses to delay their loan repayments. This weekend, he and Fukushima Mizuho of the Social Democratic Party, another junior coalition partner of equally miniscule numbers, called on/told/ordered Prime Minister Hatoyama Yukio to hold off on a decision regarding the disposition of the American Futenma Base in Okinawa until next summer’s upper house election.

What sort of man is Kamei Shizuka? As he granted an interview to the weekly Shukan Gendai that appeared in their 17 October issue, we can consider the source, as it were. Here’s most of it, in English.

*****
- People from throughout the political spectrum are skeptical about the feasibility of the legislation to establish a moratorium for small businesses and others to repay debt. Can that really be achieved?

Of course it can. That goes without saying. We’ll do it. There are no obstacles or anything else in our way. My frame of mind now is that there are no obstructions and it’s clear sailing ahead.

I discussed (the moratorium) with Prime Minister Hatoyama Yukio before the election, and he said, “(Let’s) do it.” If he were opposed to me doing it, he wouldn’t have named me Financial Services Minister.

The average annual income of the ordinary salaried worker has fallen by JPY 76,000 in the past year (about $US 877). Some people are having trouble paying off their mortgages. That’s why we should give them a break from their payments for the time being.

The response from the people has been terrific. As of yesterday, there were about 2,700 to 2,800 e-mails to my website. While some asked whether that policy would lead to a credit squeeze, 99% were encouraging and said, “Go ahead and do it.”

Yuai squad leader Kamei Shizuka

- That’s quite a difference from the critical tone taken by the major mass media outlets.

The newspapers and the rest do nothing but criticize because they don’t know what’s happening in the daily lives of the people. Their criticism includes questions about whether the government should intervene in private sector economic activity, but I want to tell them: Stop talking rubbish!

Take a look at the G20. Now, throughout the world, people are saying that the extremes of laissez-faire economics should be tempered, and governments are keeping a sharp watch on private-sector financial institutions. They’re even calling for oversight on the salaries of bank presidents.

I’m not saying we should go that far. But with bank presidents living high off the hog—financial institutions are supposed to fulfill the social responsibility of nurturing and protecting industry, aren’t they? This isn’t the G20, but where do they get the qualifications for those ridiculously high salaries.

- But the government itself is finding it difficult to reach a consensus within its ranks. Finance Minister Fujii Hirohisa expressed a different opinion, and Otsuka Kohei, a Senior Vice Minister of the Cabinet Office, also has his doubts.

Consensus? That’s not necessary at all. When I met directly with Fujii, he told me, “Mr. Kamei, go ahead and do it.” Even Hirano (Hirofumi, Chief Cabinet Secretary), when I asked him, “It seems as if you’ve been saying something (criticism),” he denied it, saying, “No, no.” They’ve just been taken in by the leading questions of some people in the mass media.

- So, contrary to reports, neither Finance Minister Fujii nor Chief Cabinet Secretary Hirano are critical at all?

“If I say ‘No’, then the Hatoyama administration collapses”

Here’s what it boils down to, for the most part: Don’t make light of Kamei. I may not be much, but I’m still the head of a political party. No one can stop me. Fujii and Hirano have a different standing than I do. If I say “No,” then the Hatoyama administration collapses. Fukushima Mizuho of the Social Democratic Party, Mr. Hatoyama—the three of us determine the course of this Government. No proposal will be submitted to the Cabinet if I reject it. What can the Finance Minister say?

This moratorium is also an employment measure. In my home district (Hiroshima), a lot of presidents of small businesses are foregoing their salary. Even if they take no salary at all, they’re bending over backwards and doing everything they can to employ the people who’ve worked at their company since days their parents were in charge. But you know, if conditions stay this way until yearend, they won’t be able to hang on any longer. They’ll have no choice but to lay those employees off.

SMBs and microenterprises account for most of the employment in Japan. The employees of big companies make up just a fraction of the whole. What do you think will happen if the SMBs and microenterprises have to lay off more employees? Today’s unemployment rate of 5.7% will jump to 7 or 8%. Even if Japan is turned into a vast wasteland, some of the big corporations and city banks will laugh out loud. What do they think they’re doing?

- There is some criticism that the absence of interest income will have serious repercussions on the operation of financial institutions.

At present there is JPY 12 trillion (about $US 139 billion) in funds for financial institution support. Of that…for example, JPY 100 billion in taxpayer funds was poured into the North Pacific Bank. Of this JPY 12 trillion, only JPY 200-300 billion has been used, so there’s plenty left over.

Here’s what banks are doing nowadays. When they, the lenders, get in trouble, they get tax money as relief. But when the borrowers, SMBs and individuals, get in trouble, they couldn’t care less. They say, “You can just collapse and disappear.” Any bank like that which doesn’t fulfill its social obligations isn’t qualified to be a bank.

Also, if we don’t save SMBs and micro-enterprises, it will weaken the operations of local shinkin banks and credit cooperatives. (Shinkin banks are regional cooperative financial institutions for SMBs and area residents. Companies with more than 300 employees cannot join.) The older men (oyaji, also means father), the executives of those SMBs, are important depositors at those institutions. The SMBs are the customers that receive financing. If we do nothing while those customers go bankrupt, the shinkin banks and credit cooperatives will go down with them too. Just how are they supposed to conduct business if all their customers collapse?

“If you don’t like working under me, then quit”

- Isn’t there any opposition from the bureaucrats involved?

We’ve said goodbye to the fiscal policies based on the strong eating the weak philosophy and market fundamentalism of Former Prime Minister Koizumi Jun’ichiro and Financial Services Minister Takenaka Heizo. I’ve decided to do the opposite of what they did. I’ve told the civil servants, “If you don’t like working under me, then quit.” They’d be happier that way, too. I’ve said that to the Financial Services Agency (FSA) employees. But not one of those guys has actually brought me their resignation yet (laughs).

Policies to deal with a credit crunch should be left to the financial institutions to begin with. But the banks are frightened of the FSA’s inspections, so they don’t want to lend to SMBs and micro-enterprises. It’s a fact that even though the manual for those inspections was revised last year to make it less stringent, it didn’t rectify the credit crunch.

So that’s why I’ve said to the FSA employees, “Even though you guys are snickering and objecting that you loosened lending conditions, from the viewpoint of the financial institutions, it’s like the sweet smile of the devil. It just gives everybody the creeps. That’s how much they resent you. That’s why we’ll do the moratorium as a bill put forward by the Financial Services Agency itself.”

If the FSA itself crafts a bill telling financial institutions to institute a moratorium on loan repayment, even the director of a shinkin bank will be able to do it with peace of mind. That’s the truth. Of course, this situation developed not through the fault of individual inspectors, but the fault of Koizumi and Takenaka, who prepared the ground for that to happen.

- Some are saying that in fact, this measure has the danger of creating the reverse effect unless the financial institutions have a better understanding of it. It will exacerbate the credit crunch because they’re concerned they’ll be stuck with bad loans.

As long as I’m in the FSA, I will not let the inspectors cause a credit crunch. I’ve told the inspectors this. I’ve said, “When the bill passes, you guys have to follow-up.”

- Last October, the People’s New Party (of which you are the head) proposed such measures as the indefinite suspension of mark-to-market accounting and dispensing with capital adequacy requirements. Are you going to work to implement these in the future?

They’ve already stopped “mark-to-market” overseas. I don’t know whether it’s a global standard or what, but Japan won’t follow a standard that the rest of the world has ended. Japan’s circumstances are unique to itself. Each country is at a different stage of development and has a different way of life. We should use a yardstick that conforms to actual conditions in every country.

The yuai squad leader

- Have you had any differences of opinion with Prime Minister Hatoyama over the moratorium?

Absolutely not. I’m the squad leader for Prime Minister Hatoyama’s yuai philosophy (of fraternalism). We can’t just mouth the word yuai—we have to consider how to incorporate that spirit in policy. I’m the squad leader for putting that into practice. That’s why the moratorium emerged, as well as the reevaluation of Japan Post.

Japan Post has a capillary-like network stretching from Hokkaido to Okinawa. If we utilize that network—if we wanted it to, it could even have the function, for example, of a matchmaking service by connecting men and women in Hokkaido and Okinawa who are looking for partners. Depending on how we use it, the Japan Post network could link the hearts of all Japanese.

- Going back to when the Cabinet appointments were made, there were reports that you would be named Defense Minister, and there was a bit of turmoil.

Well, that, the major mass media outlets were just terrible. To begin with, I wasn’t internally designated as the Defense Minister at all. On the day the Cabinet was put together, I got a phone call from Mr. Hatoyama when I was surrounded by beat reporters. He told me not to announce the appointments publicly until that evening. Now, I didn’t want to mislead the reporters, so I clearly told them, I’m not the Defense Minister (as had been rumored).

Then, one reporter asked, “Is it Ichigaya? (the name of the Tokyo neighborhood where the Defense Ministry is located)” I said it wasn’t (chigau). But for some reason, the reporters misheard that as “You’re close (chikai).” They all flew out of the room and issued these bulletins saying I was named Defense Minister.

They were even worse after that. One of the reporters who wound up filing the erroneous story asked me if I couldn’t talk about it in such a way that the mistake would be understandable. He asked if I wouldn’t say that Mr. Hatoyama had sounded me out about a Cabinet position twice, and that the first time he asked about the Defense Ministry. He wanted to turn something that didn’t happen into something that did happen, as a means of self-protection and organizational defense.

That’s why the mass media has to change in the future, too. Some reporters are acting as front men for the banking industry and criticizing the moratorium. But what should really happen is that the reporters should also be giving us the benefit of their wisdom. They could offer suggestions on good policy.

Afterwords:

* Otsuka Kohei, one of those Mr. Kamei dismissed when speaking of others in the Cabinet who objected to the moratorium, was named the head of the DPJ’s Financial Countermeasure Team on 15 September 2008, when the financial crisis began after the collapse of Lehmann Bros. The team compiled a list of measures and an action plan to encourage a response from the then-ruling LDP and the Government. Some of the suggestions included issuing yen-denominated bonds (samurai bonds) when other countries asked for financial assistance, shifting from the dollar as the base currencies to a basket of currencies, and offering financial assistance as an individual country rather than going through the IMF, to enhance the Japanese presence.

* Here I go again: One of the weaknesses of a multi-party parliamentary system is that tail ends such as Mr. Kamei wag entirely too much of the dog.

* One thing to be said in Mr. Kamei’s favor, however, is that he does seem to have an idea about the income of the average salaried worker. Prime Minister Hatoyama Yukio—the richest man in the Diet—was asked the same question in 2000, and answered JPY 10 million. When his guess became the butt of jokes, he said a few days later, “I don’t remember saying that. It’s about 8 million, isn’t it?”

I couldn’t find the figures for the year 2000 in a brief search, but the Yomiuri Shimbun reported in 2004 that after four straight years of increases, the average salary in the private sector was JPY 4.378 million (about $US 50,500). Yukio wasn’t even in the ballpark.

* In another example of “things they know that aren’t true”, academics and journalists of a certain stripe have for years been sounding false alarms about the lurking hordes of Japanese “right-wing nationalists” lying in wait for the chance to reconstitute the Japanese Empire whenever a likely pretext presented itself. That said more about their comic book vision of the non-left than it did about actual circumstances. Then again, what else can one expect from the source?

But it’s also another example demonstrating Hayek’s assertion that “conservatives” is an inaccurate term to describe those with libertarian/small government leanings (the real progressives) and shouldn’t be lumped in the same category. The “conservatives”, he noted, are usually culturally conservative and are all too willing to accept left-wing, big government premises. In Mr. Kamei’s case, that means renationalizing Japan Post and its banking and insurance businesses, as well as a platform of economic demagoguery standing on a foundation of public funds.

Recently, Mr. Kamei explored the possibility of enlarging his party or forming a new one with another cultural conservative, Hiranuma Takeo. (Both were thrown out of the LDP by Mr. Koizumi over the Japan Post privatization issue.) It came to naught, at least for the time being. It’s easy to identify this species in Japanese politics, by the way, from their birdcalls for creating a “true conservative” party.

Rather than marching into East Asia, Mr. Kamei’s policies are the type of which birds of that feather will likely pursue.

“As the Japanese certainly realize, both restoring banks and corporations to solvency and implementing significant structural change are necessary for Japan’s long-run economic health. But in the short run, comprehensive economic reform will likely impose large costs on many, for example, in the form of unemployment or bankruptcy. As a natural result, politicians, economists, businesspeople, and the general public in Japan have sharply disagreed about competing proposals for reform. In the resulting political deadlock, strong policy actions are discouraged, and cooperation among policymakers is difficult to achieve. In short, Japan’s deflation problem is real and serious; but, in my view, political constraints, rather than a lack of policy instruments, explain why its deflation has persisted for as long as it has.”
- U.S. Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke

EITHER THE BUSINESS of following the movement of money for a living attracts those of a saturnine cast, or the business of following money itself makes people that way. Even in the balmiest of economic climes, they scan the skies for storm clouds while issuing dire warnings about the sooty wisps that just float overhead or dissipate before any rain falls.

In today’s economic climate, however, those who put the dismal in the dismal science are reveling in a saturnalia of pessimism so extreme it’s time for the rest of us to pay attention to the racket they’re making instead of shutting the window. It isn’t just the United States that’s causing the analysts to pour themselves another stiff drink; even the layman senses that the Americans are building another house of cards on the lot filled with the debris from last year’s collapse. What has some money watchers reaching for the bottle this time is Japan and China.

Earlier this month, Ambrose Evans-Pritchard wrote this column in Britain’s Telegraph headlined, “It is Japan we should be worrying about, not America.”

The barman sets them up:

Japan is drifting helplessly towards a dramatic fiscal crisis. For 20 years the world’s second-largest economy has been able to borrow cheaply from a captive bond market, feeding its addiction to Keynesian deficit spending – and allowing it to push public debt beyond the point of no return.

And then pours:

Regime-change in Tokyo and the arrival of Yukio Hatoyama’s neophyte Democrats – raising $550bn (£333bn) to help fund their blitz on welfare and the “new social policy” – have concentrated the minds of investors at long last. “Markets are worried that Japan is going to hit a brick wall: the sums are gargantuan,” said Albert Edwards, a Japan-veteran at Société Générale.

Here’s the chaser:

Simon Johnson, former chief economist of the International Monetary Fund (IMF), told the US Congress last week that the debt path was out of control and raised “a real risk that Japan could end up in a major default”.

Care for a double? (My emphasis)

“The debt situation is irrecoverable,” said Carl Weinberg from High Frequency Economics. “I don’t see any orderly way out of this. They will not be able to fund their deficit. There will be a fiscal shutdown, a pension haircut, and bank failures that will rock the world. It is criminally negligent that rating agencies are not blowing the whistle on this.”

On second thought, make it a triple:

“This is incredibly dangerous,” said Russell Jones from the RBC Capital Markets. “The rate of deflation is shocking. The debt dynamics are horrible and there is the risk of a downward spiral.”

The author points some fingers:

Japan’s terrible errors are by now well known. It failed to jettison its mercantilist export model in time. It resisted the feminist revolution, leading to a baby strike by young women. It acquiesced in a mad investment bubble (like China now) in the 1980s, stealing growth from the future.

Some of that’s overstated. China and South Korea use the same mercantilist export model, and none of the three could have succeeded unless the U.S., among others, allowed it to succeed. Birth rates are falling throughout Europe and East Asia, so if there’s any “baby strike”, the picket lines aren’t just in Japan. (It also isn’t due to resistance to the feminist revolution, but we’ll be looking at that and the Chinese bubble in some upcoming posts.)

QE was too little, too late, and this is the lesson for the West. We must cut borrowing drastically over the next decade, and offset this with ultra-easy monetary policy.

By QE, he means quantitative easing, or the purchase of national and corporate debt instruments by the Bank of Japan. Finance Minister Fujii Hirohisa is upset with the BOJ for halting their QE, by the way. The central bank’s justification was concern over rising public debt, but Mr. Fujii wants them to resume. He says there’s a limit to what fiscal measures can accomplish. He did not mention structural reforms.

Added Deputy Finance Minister Noda Yoshihiko:

With the rate of price increases expected to be negative for a long period of time, we would like the Bank of Japan to indicate a clear stance on how it will deal with the situation.

Remember that it was fewer than two years ago the Democratic Party of Japan, then in the opposition, tried to create a political crisis by rejecting the Fukuda Administration’s BOJ appointments, claiming Finance Ministry OBs were unacceptable. Their rationale, which has merit and is employed as a general rule of thumb in other countries, is that they wanted to keep fiscal and monetary policy separate.

But opposition parties everywhere have a problem with remembering the things they used to scream about once they’re in charge.

(Incidentally, even when many in the DPJ signaled they were willing to accept some appointees with a Finance Ministry background, the idea was nixed by Big Boss Man Ozawa Ichiro. Mr. Ozawa has always been more interested in politics than in government, and in ruling rather than governing.)

The danger here is that central bank purchases of the debt securities of their own government create money, which is known as monetizing the debt. In addition to putting into circulation specially made pieces of paper with elaborate colored engravings that everyone pretends has value, the process allows politicians to overspend revenues without raising taxes or risking default. Since the Finance Ministry is agitating for tax increases, and there’s a real risk of default anyway, it would seem that Japan has painted itself into a corner. No wonder Mr. Fujii is concerned.

Credit rating downgrade

The following report came out about a week after the preceding article appeared:

Fitch Ratings warned Japan on Tuesday to keep to its borrowing target or risk a credit rating downgrade as the finance minister acknowledged the problem and tried to reassure rattled investors by saying spending had to be cut.

What’s the problem this time?

The government has said it plans to borrow 44 trillion yen ($490 billion) in the 2010/11 fiscal year starting next April, which would be on top of expected record issuance this fiscal year of more than 50 trillion yen. But Fitch Ratings said it’s hard to see how the 2010/11 goal will be achieved and borrowing much more than 44 trillion yen would spark a ratings review.

Thus:

“It’s not the sole determinant that will drive our assessment but other things being equal, then I think that would prompt us to review Japan’s current double AA-minus rating.”

Just when you think things can’t get any worse, they get worse.

The Government announced that Japan was again officially in a deflationary period. Here’s a passage from a website page explaining deflation, and how the lack of Japanese action in the past was deflationary:

Banks have delayed that decision (to collect on the loans), hoping asset prices would improve. These delays were allowed by national banking regulators. Some banks make even more loans to these companies that are used to service the debt they already have. This continuing process is known as maintaining an “unrealized loss”, and until the assets are completely revalued and/or sold off (and the loss realized), it will continue to be a deflationary force in the economy.

Here’s the suggestion the Deflation page authors passed along for dealing with deflation in Japan:

Improving bankruptcy law, land transfer law, and tax law have been suggested (by the Economist magazine) as methods to speed this process and thus end the deflation.

Those are probably some of the steps Mr. Bernanke had in mind. But what did the government do?

They passed through the lower house—after only eight hours of debate—Financial Services Minister Kamei Shizuka’s plan to encourage a debt moratorium and have the taxpayers guarantee the loans. In other words, instead of making the banks and businesses assume the risk—which is where it belongs—they’re making taxpayers liable for it.

Maintaining unrealized losses is deflationary. Therefore, the Japanese government is implementing a measure that will exacerbate deflation during a deflationary period.

Here’s another straw for the camel’s back: The government’s loan guarantee program has already used up half of its JPY 30 trillion (US$ 340 billion) budget, and the government says it doesn’t plan to allocate any more money. But how long will they keep singing that tune if too many default on those debts? Some default is inevitable, which means the government will be throwing the taxpayers’ money away. But what the heck, it’s only fiat money anyway. That’s the term for the money of the mind created after the debt has been monetized.

Still not worried?

As the old jest goes, if you can keep your head while those about you are losing theirs, perhaps you don’t understand the situation. Now we learn the Financial Services Agency plans to revise its rules for financial institutions to exclude debts suspended by the moratorium from the bad debt classification. In other words, the Government thinks that putting the peg in a different hole will hide the debt for the three-year moratorium period. Then, like Cinderella’s pumpkin, the name changes back and the banks have to write off the bad debts.

If the banks struggle to survive while writing off this debt, there will be inevitable calls for more taxpayer money to bail them out. Where will the government find the money to pay for all that?

Wasn’t “monetizing the debt” where we came in?

Yet another problem with Mr. Kamei’s economic demagoguery is the moral hazard. Some of the businesses freed from the responsibility of repaying their debt will either be unable to restructure their finances, or, considering human nature, may not do it at all. That would mean they go bankrupt anyway in three years, while all that fiat money backing the government’s guarantees evaporates with their business.

Still more to come

The banks are also getting the shaft from another direction. As this report notes:

“The Basel Committee on Banking Supervision is expected to raise the level at which financial institutions are required to maintain their core Tier 1 capital as early as 2012. Core Tier 1 capital includes the sum of common shares and internal reserves.”

The response of the Japanese banks:

“Mitsubishi UFJ Financial Group, Japan’s largest bank, is planning to issue a whopping 1 trillion yen ($11.2 billion) in new shares — the biggest-ever share sale by a Japanese financial institution. Investors are wondering if Sumitomo Mitsui Financial Group Inc. might be next.”

In still more other words: They’re going to dilute their stock, which has already taken a beating since Mr. Kamei announced his moratorium scheme.

It’s well past time for some people to take Mr. Bernanke’s observations seriously and make a choice: Risk losses in the next election, or risk losing the nation’s shirt.

Which one do you think the Ozawa-led DPJ chooses?

“At eighteen our convictions are hills from which we look; at forty-five they are caves in which we hide.”
- F. Scott Fitzgerald, “Bernice Bobs Her Hair”

BY NOW, the world knows that Ozawa Ichiro, Secretary-General of the ruling Democratic Party of Japan, beclowned himself last week when he held forth on global cultural and religious matters to reporters after a meeting with Matsunaga Yukei, chairman of the Japan Buddhist Federation in Wakayama.

Mr. Ozawa asserted that Christianity is “exclusive and self-righteous” and that Western society is “stuck in a dead end” (or “has reached an impasse”, depending on the translation.) He added that “Islamism is also exclusive, although it’s somewhat better than Christianity”.

That the man who controls both the Japanese government’s ruling party and the Diet seems to know so little about the world outside East Asia is disquieting. Did he not learn that America exists because it was originally a haven of religious freedom? Does he not realize how secularized Western society has become? Is he unaware that the continued Islamification of Europe will alter the face of that continent within a generation?

And where did he get the idea that Islamism is less exclusive than Christianity? It isn’t the Christians who treat non-believers as infidels to be given the choice of death or dhimmitude if they don’t convert. It isn’t the courtrooms in Christian countries that give more weight by law to the testimony of believers.

This is not to defend Mr. Ozawa—ignorance is ignorance, after all—but his is not an isolated example. More than a few politicians from the Liberal Democratic Party also exposed their breeches after their climb to the top of the greasy pole. But it’s rare for the politico in any country to have more than a rudimentary knowledge of people and events overseas. U.S. President Barack Obama, for example, thinks the people of Austria speak a language he refers to as “Austrian”. We should have learned by now that the political class devotes its time and energy to schmoozing and outsources the rest to their aides, speechwriters, or the Foreign Service.

The infotainment media worldwide bears a heavy responsibility for this ignorance. The Japanese media’s presentation of conditions overseas is kiddie-pool shallow and usually consists of little more than the superficial translation of a few newspaper or television reports. Meanwhile, the overseas media’s offerings on Japan are filled with enough bologna to launch an international chain of delicatessens.

What he also said

But the spitballers and peashooters missed several comments by Mr. Ozawa that are even more worthy of interest. For example, he also said this at his Wakayama press conference: “Modern society has forgotten or lost sight of the spirit of the Japanese people.” And most interesting of all: “Buddhism teaches you how humans should live and how the conditions of the mind should be from a fundamental standpoint.”

People also seem to be overlooking more of the Ozawa Analects delivered at a press conference on Monday this week, and at another meeting last week on the 11th. None of those bon mots seem to be in wide circulation in English, perhaps because they offer no diversion for the coffeehousers.

During his Monday press conference, Mr. Ozawa not only refused to apologize for or retract his comments, he also gave us further insight into his personal philosophy:

“The Eastern view is that humankind is one of the workings of eternal nature, while Western civilization believes that human beings are of the highest order as primates.”

And:

“(In the Buddhist worldview) people can become Buddhas during their lifetime, and when they die, everyone achieves Buddhahood. Do any other religions allow for everyone to become divinities? I expressed the basic differences in religion, philosophy, and view of life.”

He also quoted Sir Edmund Hillary, the man who gave as his reason for climbing Everest, “Because it was there”:

“Western civilization believes that (everything) exists for human beings, even nature. But Everest is worshipped as a sacred mountain by the people in the region where it is located. Most Asians do not have the idea of trying to conquer it.”

He concluded:

“Both you and I can attain Buddhahood when we die.”

Who knew that the master practitioner of Chicago-style politics in Japan was such a spiritual being at heart?

To be fair, this is nothing new for Shadow Shogun V.2. He has spoken in the past about the importance of symbiosis (kyosei) between person and person, country and country, and people and nature. There seems to be a streak of Buddhism in Mr. Ozawa that informs his views on government, and it ranges from foreign affairs to environmentalism.

In fact, it makes one wonder if he and Prime Minister Hatoyama Yukio are political and religious soul mates of a sort. We already know about Mr. Hatoyama’s family heirloom philosophy of yuai. Indeed, the man whose ideas were the inspiration for yuai once wrote (emphasis mine):

“The chaos of modern politics will only…find its end when a spiritual aristocracy seizes the means of power of society: (gun)powder, gold, ink, and uses them for the blessing of the general public.”

Here’s the latter day spiritual aristocrat explaining his support of suffrage for foreigners with permanent resident status:

“The Japanese archipelago is not only a Japanese possession. The Japanese are more infused with the Buddhist spirit than anyone else in the world, so why do we not allow foreigners to participate in local elections?”

Giving expression to that Buddhist spirit, he added:

“The earth is for all people who live with gusto. The same is true for the Japanese archipelago. It is not just for all human beings. It is the possession of animals, plants, and all creatures.”

Is there any other government among the world’s economically advanced nations in which the two most important figures talk this way? Had George W. Bush used his Christian beliefs to justify or elaborate the reasons for his policy decisions while head of government, he would have been pilloried in the U.S. for mixing church and state. That would have been followed by a global epidemic of tongue-swallowing. Meanwhile, the Japanese merely roll their eyes over yet another mention of yuai and say, “That’s Yukio.” Mr. Ozawa’s observations are considered unremarkable.

That brings us to another underreported Ozawa comment. The day after his Wakayama press conference, Mr. Ozawa addressed the closing assembly of the third Japan-China Exchange and Discussion Mechanism in Tokyo, of which he is the chair. The top-ranking representative from China was Wang Jiarui, the Chinese Communist Party International Department Minister.

He got all cosmic on us then, too:

“I am convinced that both countries can cooperate and work together in the 21st century to achieve an epochal partnership in the history of humankind in both political and economic terms, as well as in terms of culture and civilization and the global environment. This will enable the world to prosper in peace and stability, and human beings to live together and coexist with each other.”

Mr. Ozawa was not just whistling Dixie for his Chinese guest. He has long been open about his pro-Chinese sentiments while coming as close to anti-Americanism as any mainstream Japanese politician who wishes to hold power dares.

The DPJ Secretary-General has been the leader of a citizen exchange group called the Great Wall Project since 1986, when he was still a member of the LDP. He plans to lead a delegation of the group to visit China again this year. It will be their 16th trip, though this one is being conducted under the auspices of the DPJ. During a visit in late 2007, he was so obsequious to his hosts it even angered some members of his party. (They have since split.) At about the same time, he purposely kept then-American ambassador Thomas Schieffer waiting for 30 minutes before deigning to meet with him and discuss his party’s approach for global anti-terrorism efforts. China was the first country he visited after being named head of the DPJ for the second time in 2006.

Mr. Ozawa and Mr. Wang go back a long way. Their last meeting was in Tokyo in February, when Mr. Ozawa created a minor stir by telling him that he has always had a “special feeling of closeness with China”. As he was then still head of the DPJ and in line to become prime minister after the next lower house election, he promised Mr. Wang that relations with China would be given a special emphasis in a DPJ government. That same month Mr. Ozawa made his more publicized observation that the Seventh Fleet was the only American military force that needed to stay in Japan, and that the country should instead focus on closer ties with China and South Korea to deal with regional issues.

He met with Mr. Wang for 75 minutes during the latter’s February visit, but could spare only a half an hour for American Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. Meanwhile, Mr. Wang’s meeting with then-Prime Minister Aso Taro lasted 60 minutes.

Ozawa The Sinophile

Mr. Ozawa comes by his Sinophilia honestly. At the start of his national political career, he became attached to Tanaka Kakuei, who was the Big Enchilada of Japanese politics for the better part of two decades even when he wasn’t serving a term as prime minister. It was Mr. Tanaka who spearheaded the drive to recognize mainland China when the nation’s political class was split 50-50 on the issue, achieving his objective in 1972. He long worked to improve Japanese-Sino relations and formed close personal ties with members of the Chinese ruling class.

For their part, the Chinese always considered Mr. Tanaka a friend, and that friendship extends to his daughter Makiko, who briefly served as Foreign Minister in the first Koizumi Jun’ichiro Cabinet. A chip off the old block, Ms. Tanaka followed her father’s line during her term in office by urging a stronger relationship with China and South Korea and less dependence on the United States. She also disagreed with U.S. policy on Taiwan and tried to steer the Japanese position on that issue on a course independent of the Americans.

Whenever he meets with the Chinese, Ozawa Ichiro insists that he is simply following the lead of Tanaka Kakuei. He likes to quote former Chinese Premier Zhou En-lai on the subject, saying that the people who drink the water of a well should always remember the people who dug it.

While perhaps not as blatantly pro-Chinese as Mr. Ozawa, Mr. Hatoyama is clearly intent on steering Japan on a course closer to Asia than the United States (the emphasis is mine again):

The one important thing now is the spirit of yuai in foreign relations, which I have devoted the most attention to since becoming party president. That is to say, the yuai spirit elevated France and Germany, which constantly fought each other, into the EU, which does not have wars. I think that is by no means impossible to achieve in East Asia. First, cooperation between Japan and South Korea is extremely important, and then we can add China. If necessary, we can have the Americans join. I’m saying that an East Asian entity, the concept of an Asia-Pacific mechanism, is important. That’s why I said the early creation of a free trade agreement between Japan and South Korea is critical.

That’s Yukio!

Try this on for size: If Buddhism indeed informs the perspective of both Mr. Ozawa and Mr. Hatoyama, might it be one factor underlying DPJ positions regarding political circumstances in Japan, East Asia, and the alliance with America?

Japanese-Korean nationals

For example, both men strongly support suffrage in local elections for foreign nationals who are permanent residents. In practice, that means the people born and raised in Japan of Korean ancestry who have chosen to retain Korean citizenship. Supporters of the measure hide behind the euphemism of “permanent residents”, but their meaning is clear. Openly advocating the vote for that particular group would ensure focused opposition because the zainichi could easily obtain Japanese citizenship, and because of the size and outspokenness of Chongryun, the pro-North Korean organization in Japan.

Is it possible that their position is a statement of East Asian solidarity based on their expressed cultural and religious perspectives?

The LDP

Certainly some, if not most, members of the Liberal Democratic Party understand and share these Buddhist sentiments. It is also certain that somewhere in both the Ozawa and Hatoyama homes there is a kamidana, a small Shinto altar/shrine (usually on a shelf) to honor the family guardian deities.

Yet one seldom hears the LDP politicos express such explicitly Buddhist sentiments. They are more likely to talk of Shinto, and that offers an intriguing contrast between the parties. Explaining the relationship between Shinto and the Japanese would be like trying to explain the relationship between fish and water, but to put it briefly, it consists of two strains. One involves community-based customs and attitudes that have existed as long as there have been Japanese, and the other resembles an organized religion associated with the imperial line. These strains have repeatedly interacted and diverged over the centuries, but when today’s politicians speak of Shinto, it is not tantamount to a referral to the state-established variety that lasted from the Meiji Restoration in 1868 to 1945. That was just one chapter of a much longer history.

On the other hand, despite its immense impact on the country, Buddhism is an import that arrived from China via the Korean Peninsula. In fact, it was subjected to attack at the beginning of the Meiji Restoration just for this foreignness.

Thus, the visits of prime ministers Suzuki, Nakasone, and Koizumi to the Yasukuni shrine, and the visits of prime ministers Mori and Abe to the Meiji shrine, might be viewed mainly as an expression of national identity. The invocation of Buddhism by Mr. Ozawa and Mr. Hatoyama, in contrast, would therefore seem to be expressions of regional identity.

Some in the media compared Mr. Ozawa’s observation about Buddhism and Western religions to former Prime Minister Mori Yoshiro’s controversial statement to a Shinto group that Japan is a “kami no kuni”, centered on the Tenno (Emperor). That Japanese sentence is impossible to translate in a meaningful way in English, however. Without background knowledge, the Western conception of “divinity” will prevent those in the West from understanding the meaning when they read the commonly used translation of “Japan is a divine country.”.

It might be that Mr. Ozawa’s claim that “Modern society has forgotten or lost sight of the spirit of the Japanese people” sprang from a similar source within. It’s just that Mr. Mori’s approach was from a Shinto perspective, while that of Mr. Ozawa is from a Buddhist perspective.

Therefore—speaking very broadly and generally—could the emphasis on Buddhism as opposed to Shintoism by the two DPJ leaders be one way they differentiate themselves from the LDP, intentionally or not?

New Komeito

The New Komeito political party is widely assumed to be the political arm of the Soka Gakkai lay Buddhist organization. An enigma for many Japanese was their willingness to form a coalition government with the center-right LDP, despite a center-left outlook that includes pacifist tendencies and a program calling for more social welfare benefits. A relatively high percentage of the Soka Gakkai membership consists of Japanese-born Korean citizens, most of whom would welcome the chance to vote in local elections, a policy the LDP opposes. It would seem that New Komeito and the DPJ would be natural allies.

Yet Ozawa Ichiro is known for an intense dislike of New Komeito that dates back at least to his days as head of the Liberal Party, when they were in a coalition government headed by the LDP under Prime Minister Obuchi Keizo. No one seems to be able to explain it, or at least they aren’t trying to explain it in public.

Is it possible that Mr. Ozawa’s dislike of New Komeito stems from a belief that their backers represent a divergent sect of Buddhism whose beliefs have been used for nationalist aims in the past? (Soka Gakkai claims it is based on the teachings of Nichiren. See this previous post for a brief discussion of the influence of Nichirenists on early 20th century Japan.)

Polite fictions

The factual or interpretive accuracy of the Ozawa/Hatoyama cosmology is not the point in any of these matters. Nor is it important whether Buddhism was their point of departure for reaching the political position of regional identity, or whether they started from an awareness of regional identity and then employed Buddhism as a justification. What is important is whether they sincerely believe it, and whether they act on those beliefs.

But Mr. Hatoyama in particular must weigh his public statements carefully and engage in polite fictions, because telling the truth would be asking for trouble both at home and abroad. There is a long-standing debate in Japan whether it should align primarily with the West or with East Asia. Those who favor alignment with the West consist of several elements, including people who think China and the two Koreas will never take Japan’s interest into account in any regional grouping. Mr. Hatoyama’s calls for an East Asian entity are sufficient to arouse their opposition.

These folks are well aware this ground has been covered before. In a 1973 interview with Time magazine, Tanaka Kakuei felt compelled to reassure his visitors that “the U.S. comes first.” After his now notorious article in the September issue of Voice, portions of which were translated into English and published in the New York Times, Mr. Hatoyama has been similarly compelled to reassure contemporary Americans that the U.S. still comes first.

That’s what he says. In his article, Mr. Hatoyama wrote that America is waning and China is waxing. He also wrote that the U.S. is seeking to maintain its dominance, and China is seeking to attain dominance as it becomes economically powerful. He claims that an East Asian entity would be the best way to keep Chinese ambitions in check, bring order to their economic activity, and defuse nationalism in the region. It is perhaps an irony that the U.S. government pre-Obama sought to do something similar through a strategy of simultaneous engagement and balance, though more through friendship than through marriage.

Unfortunately, Mr. Hatoyama is all too sincere in these beliefs, which suggest a level of ignorance similar to that of Ozawa Ichiro’s views on international religion and culture. It is not enough to note that the Chinese naturally assume that regional dominance and hegemony is their national birthright. One has to realize the term they use for themselves is “the flower in the center of the universe”. Mr. Hatoyama is never going to change that, no matter how willing he is to share his cookies and milk.

And his view of the European Union is a mirage. The EU has had little to do with preventing another continental war, for which Europeans thankfully no longer have the stomach. Instead, it has evolved into an oppressive, top-down meddling behemoth of a bureaucracy that is a multinational Kasumigaseki times ten. Czech President Vaclav Klaus calls its governing principle “post-democracy”: “where there is no democratic accountabiity, and the decisions are made by politicians, appointed by politicians, not elected by citizens in free elections.” That sounds like just the sort of thing a spiritual aristocrat could sink his teeth into.

Japanese-American relations

Too much Hatoyama honesty causes too many problems for Japanese-American relations, but we can be frank: some contemporary Americans make too much of themselves for what their ancestors did and act as if they are owed eternal subservience.

As it is unfair to hold contemporary Japanese responsible for their ancestors’ behavior, it is just as unreasonable to remain in liege to America for its past behavior. Yes, the Japanese did what they did, and the Americans did what they did, but Imperial Japan and the U.S. of the 1940s no longer exist, and the world is a much different place. It is as if the Americans perceive a Japanese and Western European failure to pledge emotional and financial fealty as ingratitude.

Christopher Preble, writing on the Cato Institute’s blog, recently expressed this idea:

From the perspective of our allies in East Asia (chiefly the Japanese and the South Koreans), and for the Europeans tucked safely within NATO, getting the Americans to pay the costs, and assume the risks, associated with policing the world is a pretty good gig.

Mr. Preble needs to pay more attention to the details. In 2002 Japan’s contributions represented more than 60% of all allied financial contributions to the US, and covered 75% of the USFJ’s operating costs. That contribution has declined somewhat since then, but it is still substantial. He also overlooks the risks Japan faces if the American military were to use its locally based forces to intervene in a Chinese attack on Taiwan, for example. Does he think the Chinese would consider those bases in Japan to be off-limits for retaliation?

To those Americans who would complain that the Japanese are using the Peace Constitution as an excuse, it might be asked: Just whose idea was that anyway? Americans wanted to create a pacifist culture in Japan after the war, and they succeeded. The legal basis for the Japanese state does not come in a ring binder whose leaves are to be inserted or removed on the whims of politicians in another country according to the circumstances of the day.

And that brings us to the ultimate in polite fictions—unless you’re certain that the United States would come to the aid of the Japanese if the latter were attacked. There is speculation from U.S. sources now circulating in the Japanese media that an American military response would be a 50-50 proposition at best.

Former Prime Minister Abe Shinzo called for an end to the post-war regime. Would it not be an irony if his political foes in the DPJ were the ones to achieve it?

But why stop there? Isn’t it high time the Americans moved on from the post-war paradigm as well? Everyone might be better off by letting the neo-Buddhists in the DPJ start the process of Japan seeking a new equilibrium on its own. Owing to its history, Japan is unlikely to ever be wholly aligned with either East or West. And owing to its history, that might be the best course for all concerned, because it’s uniquely positioned to serve as a bridge between both.

In that event, the key for the Japanese would be to remain aware that lurking in the shadows of the shining path is the resentment from both for belonging to neither.

Afterwords:

* Some Japanese worry that the DPJ approach will cause the U.S. to move toward the Chinese at Japanese expense. Surely they are forgetting the traditional Chinese outlook toward foreign affairs and other countries. Now that the Chinese are reverting to their default attitude, it would seem that Japan doesn’t have much to worry about.

* Here’s a link to a review of the book Zen at War by Brian Victoria, which describes Zen Buddhism’s intellectual and emotional contributions to the Japanese war effort. The review is worth reading for that reason, despite the self-indulgent prose and the swallowing whole of the claims in Iris Chang’s book. The reviewer also claims the book could never have been written in Japan, and he has a point. The Japanese would not have failed to mention that the Tokugawas used the requirement for families to register with Buddhist temples as a weapon to eliminate Christianity. Nor would they have failed to mention that since the warrior class initially popularized Zen in Japan, it would have been natural for some Japanese Zen Buddhists to get behind the war in their own way. The reviewer also seems to think that “it could happen again”, which is just silly.

* The Time magazine interview with Tanaka Kakuei contains this passage:

“In the big cities, the left tends to support academic men. They usually are not very hardworking, but for some reason they appeal to people, especially since they don’t wave the red flag of their socialist and Communist sponsors but the green flag [of the fight against pollution].”

Plus ça change, plus c’est la même chose.

* When I taught adult English classes years ago, I liked to do quick surveys of my students to find out what religions they professed to believe in as part of the classroom discussion. About 1% of Japanese are Christians, but historical factors boost that to about 5% in Kyushu, and a slightly higher percentage than that show up to study English on their own time and dime.

I asked students to raise their hands when I mentioned a religion. Almost no one raised their hand when I asked if they were Shinto. Almost everyone raised their hands when I asked if they were Buddhist.

* The quote at the top of the post refers to the behavior of everyone mentioned in the post itself.

THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY OF JAPAN owes its victory in the August lower house elections to the electorate’s long-standing desire for sweeping reforms in the conduct of government and the realization that they weren’t going to get it from the Liberal-Democratic Party as presently constituted. But in much fewer than the 100 days often used as a benchmark for political performance elsewhere, it has become apparent that the only sweeping the DPJ’s new brooms will do is hide its reform promises under the carpet. Meanwhile, the party’s victory has had the unexpected byproduct of unfastening the lid on the Pandora’s box of their membership and allowing some unappealing specimens to ooze into public view. One of them is Kushibuchi Mari, as we’ve seen here.

Another is Hatsushika Akihiro. In Tokyo’s 16th district, Mr. Hatsushika defeated Shimamura Yoshinobu, who formerly served as Education Minister and Agriculture, Forestry, and Fisheries Minister. Mr. Shimamura had served nine terms in office and is 75 years old, 35 years older than his handsome challenger. The desire for new blood as well as change was likely a factor in Mr. Hatsushika’s victory.

But what does Mr. Hatsushika believe beyond the standard political boilerplate? He gave the country an idea on his Japanese-language website in this translated message posted on 30 July 2002.

*****

In Japan, we generally use the term Kitachosen (North Korea) to refer to the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea. Most Japanese use the term Kitachosen without a second thought. But is that the appropriate name for the country?

That’s why I don’t use the term Kitachosen. I make every effort to call the country Joseon or The Republic because the people of Joseon are as proud of their own country as I am proud of the country Japan. I do not think we should negligently wound their pride.

****

Mr. Hatsushika wrote this blog entry when North Korea still maintained it had not abducted Japanese citizens. Just two months later, Kim Jong-il came partially clean to then-Prime Minister Koizumi Jun’ichiro and admitted they had occurred after all.

Alas, that entry on Mr. Hatsushika’s blog exists no longer. Someone’s erased it. Was he concerned that it might have an untoward effect on his election campaign? Has he never heard the expression about information wanting to be free?

But Mr. Hatsushika left a few blank spaces in his explanation of how words are supposed to mean things. Let’s fill some of them in.

* The Japanese government has a treaty with South Korea in which it recognizes the latter as the only lawful government on the Korean Peninsula.

* Mr. Hatsushika is not alone in his choice of Joseon or The Republic as the names used to refer to North Korea. Those are the names preferred by the DPRK itself, as well as the General Association of Korean Residents in Japan, or Chongryon, and they reject any other. The latter group is closely allied with North Korea, supports the country’s juche ideology, and is opposed to the integration of its members in Japanese society. Six of its officials are also delegates of the Supreme People’s Assembly, which the reference books say is the name of the North Korean “parliament”.

* Chongryon does not refer to South Korea as Kankoku. Instead, it uses the term Minamichosen (as it would be Romanized from the Japanese). The Japanese term for North Korea, Kitachosen, means North (Kita) Joseon (Chosen). Minami is the Japanese word for south.

* The Japanese media in the past used to refer to the North as Kitachosen while including the full Democratic People’s Republic of Korea name at least once during each report, at Chongryon’s request. That ended with the revelation of the truth about the abductions. The news media noted that they didn’t use the formal name of any other country in their reports.

* Chongryon operates about 60 schools nationwide for the children of its members, including one university. Pictures of Kim Il-sung and Kim Jong-il adorn the classroom walls. According to the Chongryon newspaper, Hatsushika Akihiro is a strong supporter of those schools. He’s also visited North Korea—or should we say The Republic?—several times.

* The Korean pronunciation of the Chinese characters for Kankoku (South Korea) would be Hanguk, which those familiar with the Korean language will instantly recognize.

Fancy that: here’s another member of the ruling Democratic Party of Japan sitting in the Diet who’s an ally of an enemy of the state. (Friends of the state wouldn’t kidnap its citizens and hold them for some 15 years, now would they?) And since he’s at the ripe young age of 40—and wrote that blog post at the age of 33—Mr. Hatsushika had to have formed his views when the criminal venality of the Kim Family Regime had never been more obvious.

It would seem that the personality type of the poseur lifestyle Leftist is a universal phenomenon. Instead of wearing Che Guevara t-shirts, the Japanese fancy the Kim Jong-il model instead.

Where did this defender of neo-Stalinism come from, and how did he get where he is?

Pyeongyang's pal in the Diet

It’s a fascinating story. Mr. Hatsushika was graduated from the University of Tokyo with a degree from the Faculty of Law. That has traditionally been the point of departure on the elite track for those interested in a career in politics or government. Mr. Hatsushika seems to have gotten intellectually sidetracked, but he still wound up at the station punched on his ticket. He entered politics by being elected to a seat on the Tokyo Metropolitan Assembly on his second try.

Japanese political parties usually determine the candidates they choose to support for Diet seats themselves without holding primary elections for the voters. That means the DPJ thought Hatsushika Akihiro was worthy of a seat in the Japanese Diet.

It probably also helped that he worked as an aide to DPJ head and current Prime Minister Hatoyama Yukio between his first and second try for a Tokyo Metro seat.

It’s time to revisit James Delingpole again, speaking to Americans about their 2008 presidential election:

“I warned the U.S. of the ‘smorgasbord of scuzzballs, incompetents, time servers, Communists, class warriors, eco-loons, single-issue rabble-rousers, malcontents and losers who always rise to the surface during a left-liberal administration….it becomes a problem – as you’re about to discover, if you haven’t already – when your ruling administration consists of nothing but these people. No longer do they qualify as light relief. They become your daily nightmare…. Making these predictions was a no-brainer because it’s exactly the same process as we’ve witnessed in Britain these last twelve years under New Labour.’”

This would seem to be another universal phenomenon.

Instead of voting in reformers, the Japanese electorate inadvertently flipped the lid on a Pandora’s box filled with the most motley of crews. Their promises have been broken with childish excuses, they are reinforcing the bureaucratic influence rather than weakening it, and they are conducting the business of government with tragicomic incompetence.

This weekend, U.S. President Barack Obama is meeting with Prime Minister Hatoyama Yukio, the patron of Hatsushika Akihiro. The meeting is likely to go smoothly. After all, they have much in common, starting with an amateurishness in handling the affairs of state and conducting blatantly illegal fund-raising operations.

And continuing with the similarity in the views of their political associates.