BOOK REVIEW : Japan as anything but number one

[chikazukiyasui]

The book sounds interesting, but foreign companies do manufacture in Japan -- often under Japanese brand names -- with varying degrees of success. For instance, Coca Cola has a big presence in Japan, with its Aquarius brand, among others, and Ford manufactures cars under the Mazda brand, while Daimler controls Mitsubishi Trucks (they have problems there, but not caused by the factors mentioned in your book review), and so on. So the book is slightly wrong on that point.

On the matter of education, I realize it is fashionable to complain about the rote learning that goes on in Japanese schools, but it would be a mistake to think that such learning does not yield good results. Japan and other countries, like South Korea and India, that have an "old-style", not-much-fun, facts-based approach to education produce high quality professionals and a lot of creative people, both in the sciences and in the arts.

As to Japan's being undemocratic compared to Western countries, I have my doubts. Certainly it is less democratic than Switzerland, but what country isn't? Its system is similar to that of several European countries, and probably has better checks and balances than some. Incidentally, I don't think the US is very democratic at all (at the national level - parts of the US have strong local democracy), even compared to Japan, partly because of the excessive power of rich lobbies, and partly because of the electoral system, which is quite primitive.

As for group harmony, well, its all a matter of degree, isn't it? I don't know if any developed country has wiped out class differences yet. If we compare with the US, is Japan more or less "harmonious"? I'm tempted to say "more", given how much poverty there is in parts of the US.

Finally, politics quite possibly does follow the economy in Japan, as the author says, but it is not obvious to me that that is necessarily a bad thing.

[Maciamo]

The book sounds interesting, but foreign companies do manufacture in Japan -- often under Japanese brand names -- with varying degrees of success. For instance, Coca Cola has a big presence in Japan, with its Aquarius brand, among others, and Ford manufactures cars under the Mazda brand, while Daimler controls Mitsubishi Trucks (they have problems there, but not caused by the factors mentioned in your book review), and so on. So the book is slightly wrong on that point.

The book is from 1990, and a new law a few years ago allowed foreign companies to manufacture/do busines in Japan if they took over or made a partnership with a Japanese company. Now that makes Japan about as open as China. (!) Anyhow, it is almost only American companies that were allowed to establish themselves in Japan, thanks to the special relationship between the US and Japan (let's say that the US didn't leave the choice to its "militarily protected partner").

As to Japan's being undemocratic compared to Western countries, I have my doubts. Certainly it is less democratic than Switzerland, but what country isn't? Its system is similar to that of several European countries, and probably has better checks and balances than some. Incidentally, I don't think the US is very democratic at all (at the national level - parts of the US have strong local democracy), even compared to Japan, partly because of the excessive power of rich lobbies, and partly because of the electoral system, which is quite primitive.

I am European and have lived in several EU countries, and I sincerely think that Japan is very far away from Europe. Not on the surface. People do vote based on a democratic system. But what is the point voting for people when you know that about 90% of them will be elected anyway due to the restricted number of candidates (at least for local elections). It's almost like Cuba that started "democratic elections" with exactly the same number of candidates as seats available !

Anyway, the LDP has been in power since its creation 46 years ago, and politicians inherit their position from the parents.
But the most undemocratic is how little concern those politicians have for public opinion. They get elected and do not give a sh't about their program, promises, on interest of the people. This exist to some extent in the West, but nowhere near like Japan.

Then calling the US a democratic country is like believing that all countries that have "democratic" in their name are.

As for group harmony, well, its all a matter of degree, isn't it? I don't know if any developed country has wiped out class differences yet. If we compare with the US, is Japan more or less "harmonious"? I'm tempted to say "more", given how much poverty there is in parts of the US.

The book was written in reaction to all those Japanologists saying that Japan was almost a perfectly equal society where 90% of the people belonged to the middle class (what Japanese will also tell you), when in fact it is only propaganda and indoctrination as differences in salary about the same as the European average.

Worse, it is not one's capabilities, character or intelligence that determines the job and salary, but which university, school and even nursery school one attended (meaning obviously that those who went to expensive private schools, which fed them to famous universities, get the best jobs).

[chikazukiyasui]

Anyhow, it is almost only American companies that were allowed to establish themselves in Japan, thanks to the special relationship between the US and Japan (let's say that the US didn't leave the choice to its "militarily protected partner").

I would be complaining about the USA, whose "special relationships" with a bunch of countries amount to Imperialism without responsibility.

I am European and have lived in several EU countries, and I sincerely think that Japan is very far away from Europe. Not on the surface. People do vote based on a democratic system. But what is the point voting for people when you know that about 90% of them will be elected anyway due to the restricted number of candidates (at least for local elections). It's almost like Cuba that started "democratic elections" with exactly the same number of candidates as seats available !

You may be right. I'm not sure I believe in democracy, anyway (except direct democracy) -- I think it is a con -- but if you're saying that people in Europe, more than peole in Japan, can influence the direction of politics by voting, I would say that it is true of some countries. Modern Italy, like Japan, has had the experience of one party being continuously in power for very many years (despite frequent changes of government). It's not unique. In fact, I would say that everything you say about the Japanese political system applies to Italy in spades.

The book was written in reaction to all those Japanologists saying that Japan was almost a perfectly equal society where 90% of the people belonged to the middle class (what Japanese will also tell you), when in fact it is only propaganda and indoctrination as differences in salary about the same as the European average.

That's fine, but we wouldn't want to over-react, would we?

[Maciamo]

You may be right. I'm not sure I believe in democracy, anyway (except direct democracy) -- I think it is a con -- but if you're saying that people in Europe, more than peole in Japan, can influence the direction of politics by voting, I would say that it is true of some countries. Modern Italy, like Japan, has had the experience of one party being continuously in power for very many years (despite frequent changes of government). It's not unique. In fact, I would say that everything you say about the Japanese political system applies to Italy in spades.

I was thinking about France, Belgium or Germany. In the last French presidential elections, there were about 20 candidates, and the highest %age of vote (Chirac) was only about 20% because of the multitude of parties. In Belgium, there are 10 major parties (5 by linguistic groups). After a corruption scandal involving the socialist party was revealed, it immediately lost 10% of the votes. When the mad cow disease and dioxixe chicken cases appeared, the public voted massively for the Green Party, which more than doubled its seats (reaching 20% in the French speaking area). That is a clear refelction of democracy, and politicians actually did go in the same direction as they promised.

The UK's politics is more elitist (all PM's graduated from Oxbridge of public schools), and parties reflect the class system (which I think is a good thing). BUt politicians are usually very able, at the exact opposite of Japan, and maybe more similar to the elite bureaucrats of Japan, making the right decisions for the country, which the less informed or less well-educated public cannot always understand.

Italy's political system is a basket case, and the high corruption compares very well indeed to the situation in Japan.

[chikazukiyasui]

I was thinking about France, Belgium or Germany. In the last French presidential elections, there were about 20 candidates, and the highest %age of vote (Chirac) was only about 20% because of the multitude of parties. In Belgium, there are 10 major parties (5 by linguistic groups). After a corruption scandal involving the socialist party was revealed, it immediately lost 10% of the votes. When the mad cow disease and dioxixe chicken cases appeared, the public voted massively for the Green Party, which more than doubled its seats (reaching 20% in the French speaking area). That is a clear refelction of democracy, and politicians actually did go in the same direction as they promised.

France and Belgium are both interesting cases. Belgium has a right-wing party called the Vlaams Blok that has huge support. It has practically been banned (partially in the Flemish area, and totally in the Francophone area), because of its right-wing views. That's not very democratic. France's general election in which Chirac won was an interesting case of the people settling for what they don't want (Chirac) in order to avoid getting what they even more definitely don't want (le Pen). That's something that happens often in a representational democracy. France is also routinely held to ransome by its farmers, which is something that happens in Japanese politics, too. So, I accept that these countries do let the electorate influence politics up to a point, but still say that even these have pretty big questions hanging around how democratic they really are.

The UK's politics is more elitist (all PM's graduated from Oxbridge of public schools), and parties reflect the class system (which I think is a good thing). BUt politicians are usually very able, at the exact opposite of Japan, and maybe more similar to the elite bureaucrats of Japan, making the right decisions for the country, which the less informed or less well-educated public cannot always understand.

Italy's political system is a basket case, and the high corruption compares very well indeed to the situation in Japan.

Well, not all PMs came from the background you say. John Major is a recent exception, and most French top politicians seem to be Sorbonne graduates. I agree that basically, UK politicians (at the national level) are pretty competent and honourable by global standards. They have to jump through several meritocratic hoops before they get to the top, and it would be impossible for someone as ignorant and inarticulate as Bush to get to the top in British politics. On the other hand, you want to see our local politics, or even the Scottish Parliament. An utter disgrace. I also agree that Italy is a basket case, politically. Funny thing is, nobody in the country seems to care. I think, if anything, Japan is somewhat better than Italy, though its problems are similar in form.