Duvniask wrote:Hakons wrote:
"The people I don't like keep winning elections, therefore it's a failed democracy"
If there's one way to make my blood boil, it's to snidely and obnoxiously mischaracterize what I've said, portraying about as much nuance as a white canvas. Studying these things is part of my discipline, so shut the hell up with that nonsense. It has nothing to do with my personal preferences in terms of party and candidates; it has everything to do with the system, of which any casual analysis suggests a jumble of problems.
The election system results in massive amounts of malapportionment and consistently places into power a party that the majority of the people didn't vote for. Not only that, it gives the governing coalition a super-majority (which is necessary to alter the constitution), whilst it gets less than half of the votes. The Supreme Court is toothless: it has declared recent elections to be "in a state of unconstitutionality", yet it refuses to nullify the election results. The party in power is also deeply intertwined with the bureaucratic and corporate establishment (the so-called "iron-triangle"), resulting in lots of corruption, pork-barrel spending, and general rule by vested interests without the input of the people as a whole. Freedom of speech is also troubled: The state applies political pressure on journalists and generally seems to want to stifle criticism covertly. That is not even mentioning the whole issue of the kisha-club system, with which the media and politicians are placed in a symbiotic relationship completely detrimental to critical journalistic practice.
Thus, Japan has a dominant-party system with the same party almost without fail being in power for the last half century, while the opposition is fractured and incapable of mounting any challenge. This has also made apathy widespread: in opinion polls you'll generally see a great mass of people saying they support "no party", sometimes even with this group being the largest. Add to all this a widespread culture of hereditary politics where elites essentially "inherit" their positions of power via their family and class connections and you have quite the democratic challenge.
More reading about Iron triangles and Japanese politics in general. While it is somewhat dated, and getting to the sources can be a bit tricky, I find that it is useful reading.
Political nicknaming:
Duvniask wrote:Northern Davincia wrote:Abe-san is alright.
No.
In typical lolbertarian fashion, you come out in favor of an authoritarian* that, to the extent the system allows it, cracks down on free speech. A man who worships the imperial system. A man who is part of an organization that essentially engages in the East Asian equivalent of Holocaust-denial. I could go on, but I don't think I need to say any more.
*He isn't a dictator, nor am I suggesting he wants to be one, but that does not mean his politics and style of governance aren't authoritarian, even in the context of a democratic system.
Emphasis mine.
"Lolbertardian" is a common insult for libertarians and that just seems like a play on it.
