Japanese Communists 2nd in fundraising, 1st(?!) in local elected officals

[cyu]

Sounds a bit too reformist, but better red(dish) than dead.

Excerpts from http://pww.org/article/articleview/15365/

The party's ranks are swelling, it has 24,000 branch offices and more than a million people read its newspaper. Only one party- the one that runs the country- beats it at fundraising.

the party's litany of capitalist evils is now resonating deeply with many Japanese- especially the young- who are feeling the pain of an economic downturn that some say has reached depression dimensions.

Financial meltdowns worldwide. Banks and manufacturers going belly up, or begging for bailouts. Unemployment and unrest on the rise.

Capitalism, Shii concludes, is doomed.

The Japan Communist Party was founded as an illegal movement in 1922, but legalized after Japan's World War II defeat in 1945. It then struggled through polarizing splits with the Soviets and Communist Chinese in an effort to maintain its independence. It also has distanced itself from the radical left, which gained popularity in the 1960s and '70s, but has since died down.

Marx's Das Kapital is now available in cartoon form, and a surprise best-seller of the year has been a revival version of "Kanikosen," a 1929 novel about exploited workers on a crab boat. That novel, too, is out in manga form, and is being made into a movie.

According to the party, about 1,000 new members are joining its ranks every month- a sharp contrast to the massive exodus that has plagued the ruling Liberal Democrats, who have dropped from about 5 million members in their heyday to about 1 million members now.

the Communist Party has swelled to about 415,000 members at latest count and boasts a newspaper, Red Flag, with a readership of 1.6 million.

Shii said his party is willing to work within Japan's system- he said it does not advocate immediate or violent revolution.

Though weak at the national level, the communists boast more elected officials than any other party because of their strong presence in local and prefectural assemblies, where they have more than 3,000 seats.

[x359594]

Although it still describes itself as Marxist-Leninist, the JCP resembles the Kautsky wing of the old SPD.

The JCP has an English language webpage: http://www.jcp.or.jp/english/ .

[Revy]

Have they spoken about robots? That may seem like a strange question, but robots are increasingly being used in Japan as workers.

We need to tell people, not to be technophobic, it's the capitalist system which creates unemployment, but robots would be highly beneficial under socialism.

[Die Neue Zeit]

Although it still describes itself as Marxist-Leninist, the JCP resembles the Kautsky wing of the old SPD.

The JCP has an English language webpage: http://www.jcp.or.jp/english/ .

I'm about to read the JCP's program to see if your assertion that it's a "Kautskyist" party is valid. If the JCP is indeed building up a politico-ideologically independent worker-class movement in Japan like the pre-war independent centrists of the SPD (as opposed to the lazy squabblers that comprised much of the party's quasi-syndicalist wing), then that's a good thing. If, on the other hand, the JCP is just all talk and no building like the vulgar "centrists" of the SPD, then that's a bad thing.

[JohnnyC]

After reading their program it seems to me that real socialism for them is just some ideal for the very distant future.(that they are going to achieve through reform instead of revolution)

http://www.jcp.or.jp/english/23rd_congress/program.html

I'm wondering if there is a radical wing in the party or are they all social democrats.

[Ismail]

I'm wondering if there is a radical wing in the party or are they all social democrats.Generally the radical wings seem to have either broke off or were expelled.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japanese_Communist_Party_(Left_Faction) (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japanese_Communist_Party_%28Left_Faction%29)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japanese_Communist_Party_(Action_Faction) (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japanese_Communist_Party_%28Action_Faction%29)

On the JCP in the 70's:


Miyamoto became head of the JCP in 1958.[1] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kenji_Miyamoto_%28politician%29#cite_note-nyt-0) That same year, Miyamoto publicly renounced his previous calls for a violent Communist revolution (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communist_revolution) in Japan.[1] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kenji_Miyamoto_%28politician%29#cite_note-nyt-0) Instead, he and the JCP now switched to a peaceful stance, which Miyamoto called "Smiling Communism (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Smiling_Communism&action=edit&redlink=1)."[1] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kenji_Miyamoto_%28politician%29#cite_note-nyt-0) The party under Miyamoto began emphasizing issues such as housing, inflation and ducation.[1] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kenji_Miyamoto_%28politician%29#cite_note-nyt-0) Miyamoto further mainstreamed the JCP throughout his term. He oversaw the removal of the phrase "proletarian dictatorship (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proletarian_dictatorship)" following the JCP convention in 1976 and replaced it with a declaration supporting democracy and freedom.[2] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kenji_Miyamoto_%28politician%29#cite_note-jt-1) The party has continued with this platform that Miyamoto began up to the present day.

[KurtFF8]

While it is good to have a party with the potential to influence an OECD country that has socialism as its official ideology, we should not be overly optimistic. From the article:


"We want to fix social inequities within the framework of capitalism," Shii said. "It will take time for people to make adjustments and be ready. We aren't advocating a sudden change to communism."

[Random Precision]

I think this is a positive development. Revolutionary consciousness doesn't spring out of nowhere, and workers with a developing consciousness will often move toward reformist groups like the JCP first. We're seeing this as well in Latin America, with the mass support of reformist movements like the MAS in Bolivia and PSUV in Venezuela.

[KC]

I think this is a positive development. Revolutionary consciousness doesn't spring out of nowhere, and workers with a developing consciousness will often move toward reformist groups like the JCP first. We're seeing this as well in Latin America, with the mass support of reformist movements like the MAS in Bolivia and PSUV in Venezuela.

Yes, but there also has to be some form of organization or trend that continues to develop consciousness so that such parties can't effectively bleed the energy out of the movement (like MAS in Bolivia and PSUV in Venezuela).

[Random Precision]

Yes, but there also has to be some form of organization or trend that continues to develop consciousness so that such parties can't effectively bleed the energy out of the movement (like MAS in Bolivia and PSUV in Venezuela).

I agree completely. I don't think the automatic writing off of reformist movements we most often see on this site is helpful at all though.

[Die Neue Zeit]

You forgot to include Die Linke in Germany. :(

[KC]

You forgot to include Die Linke in Germany.

What was the point of this post? RP listed two organizations as examples; a ton of organizations could have been equally listed there. So I don't think RP "forgot" anybody, as it's not supposed to be a comprehensive list. If you're going to make a post then make a post; don't make a stupid pointless one-liner like this that is completely irrelevant to the point being made.

[Spooky]

Sounds a bit too reformist, but better red(dish) than dead.

Excerpts from

The party's ranks are swelling, it has 24,000 branch offices and more than a million people read its newspaper. Only one party- the one that runs the country- beats it at fundraising.

the party's litany of capitalist evils is now resonating deeply with many Japanese- especially the young- who are feeling the pain of an economic downturn that some say has reached depression dimensions.

Financial meltdowns worldwide. Banks and manufacturers going belly up, or begging for bailouts. Unemployment and unrest on the rise.

Capitalism, Shii concludes, is doomed.

The Japan Communist Party was founded as an illegal movement in 1922, but legalized after Japan's World War II defeat in 1945. It then struggled through polarizing splits with the Soviets and Communist Chinese in an effort to maintain its independence. It also has distanced itself from the radical left, which gained popularity in the 1960s and '70s, but has since died down.

Marx's Das Kapital is now available in cartoon form, and a surprise best-seller of the year has been a revival version of "Kanikosen," a 1929 novel about exploited workers on a crab boat. That novel, too, is out in manga form, and is being made into a movie.

According to the party, about 1,000 new members are joining its ranks every month- a sharp contrast to the massive exodus that has plagued the ruling Liberal Democrats, who have dropped from about 5 million members in their heyday to about 1 million members now.

the Communist Party has swelled to about 415,000 members at latest count and boasts a newspaper, Red Flag, with a readership of 1.6 million.

Shii said his party is willing to work within Japan's system- he said it does not advocate immediate or violent revolution.

Though weak at the national level, the communists boast more elected officials than any other party because of their strong presence in local and prefectural assemblies, where they have more than 3,000 seats.

I think this is missing the point. It seems like this debate is taking place outside the specific conditions of Japanese politics.

Japan has been ruled by one party since WWII or so, and only left power once in the mid-1990s. LDP gained power after that, and rules still today. And that Party ist he LDP (Liberal Democratic Party).

The Socialist Party is its major rival, although it has never been in government, except in a minority coalition in the 1990s, when LDP lost power.

The Communist party was a force from WWII or so to the 1960s. However, the party's name is a misnomer. Many Communist parties who call themselves as such are not Communist parties. Their agenda has been incredibly softened due to its long presence as a minority party in Parliament.

So, these are my conclusions.

1. The Communist party will NEVER gain power in Japan. The LDP has only lost power once in all of modern Japanese history, and that was to a coalition of ALL minority parties together. Not only that, but the Japanese political party is specifically rigged to be in favor of the LDP. It would then be absolutely necessary for the JCP to enter into a coalition with another party or two or three to be able to form government at all. Most likely the Socialists. So, their ability to lead truly revolutionary change will be impossible, unless you want your ruling coalition to fall apart, and thus your political power to fall apart.

2. the JCP is incredibly watered down after decades and decades being a minority party. One of the characteristics in Japanese politics is that, instead of oppposing power, minority parties tend to work with, or go along with, the ruling party, or the LDP. Thus, the JCP is not a radical party: it has been subserviant to the JDP for a little less than a century now (including the era of Japan's economic liberalization of the 1970s, 1980s)

3. Just because something calls itself Communist doesn't mean it is. And even if they do gain power, nothing truly revolutionary or significant will take place.

It's just the nature of the political beast, and speaks to Marx's insight that any truly revolutionary party working in a liberal democratic discourse will inevitably become part of the system itself.

So before we go getting our hopes up about anything, it is a prerequisite to actually understand the system of politics in which these actors are working. Otherwise we are just going off speculation and false beliefs.

[Spooky]

While it is good to have a party with the potential to influence an OECD country that has socialism as its official ideology, we should not be overly optimistic. From the article: "We want to fix social inequities within the framework of capitalism," Shii said. "It will take time for people to make adjustments and be ready. We aren't advocating a sudden change to communism."


Exactly. Thank you.

[Spooky]

Generally the radical wings seem to have either broke off or were expelled.



Exactly. Once again more proof for Marx's assertion of the inability to affect serious, substantial change within the framework of the status quo.

To participate in the system, they must rid themselves of those bits which the liberal democratic discourse finds unsavory.

It's no longer a Communist party. Just like the Democratic Republic of Congo is not a Democracy.

[DancingLarry]

I agree completely. I don't think the automatic writing off of reformist movements we most often see on this site is helpful at all though.

It's really not the job of people like those of us at this site to build up reformist movements. In fact, if reformist movements are the whole answer, then there is no need for places like this site, and people like those of us who use it. OTOH, if reformist movements and organizations are insufficient to the need, then there is a need for those of us who find the faults and failings of reformism, and places where we aren't constrained to limit our criticism of them.

[KurtFF8]

I think this is a positive development. Revolutionary consciousness doesn't spring out of nowhere, and workers with a developing consciousness will often move toward reformist groups like the JCP first. We're seeing this as well in Latin America, with the mass support of reformist movements like the MAS in Bolivia and PSUV in Venezuela.

Absolutely, I agree with this. I didn't mean to jump on the bandwagon of "well they're reformist so we should just pretend that it doesn't matter!" It's certainly a positive development. It's much easier to work with a party that claims to build socialism than it is to work with a party that is opposed to it, regardless of what the actual intentions of the party are, it's about getting the masses ready for the idea of socialism, not some top down formula for how socialism will come to countries like Japan.

Just because the party may be reformist doesn't make it something the left needs to ignore or not work with.

[redarmyfaction38]

Absolutely, I agree with this. I didn't mean to jump on the bandwagon of "well they're reformist so we should just pretend that it doesn't matter!" It's certainly a positive development. It's much easier to work with a party that claims to build socialism than it is to work with a party that is opposed to it, regardless of what the actual intentions of the party are, it's about getting the masses ready for the idea of socialism, not some top down formula for how socialism will come to countries like Japan.

Just because the party may be reformist doesn't make it something the left needs to ignore or not work with.
in the first instance, workers will turn to the established (bourgeouis) democratic political parties and trade unions, it will be the failure of those institutions to deliver their reasonable demands that will lead the working class to revolutionary conclusions.
we see this today right across europe, whilst the demands of visteon workers are not yet revolutionary, the actions they have taken, occupying factories, picketing in order to prevent the removal of assets are.
they are a direct challenge to capitalist ownership and control.
the same can be said for the "kidnapping" of senior management in france and spain.
the political consciousness of those actions might not be there yet, but there is a real understanding of the need for workers to fight in order to gain even the smallest concession.
imo, this can only be good for the movement, whilst being members of established trade unions and political parties, workers are learning they have to take "matters" into their own hands.
viva la revolucion.

[teenagebricks]

I think people are missing the point somewhat, you want a communist revolution in Japan? Fine, but I don't think the Americans will be too happy about it, how long do you think it would take for them to invade the place? One week? One month? One year at the very most. Japan is thriving economically but it is still vulnerable. In a country as politically stable as Japan, reformism is the only reasonable solution to the capitalist problem.

[Random Precision]

Absolutely, I agree with this. I didn't mean to jump on the bandwagon of "well they're reformist so we should just pretend that it doesn't matter!" It's certainly a positive development. It's much easier to work with a party that claims to build socialism than it is to work with a party that is opposed to it, regardless of what the actual intentions of the party are, it's about getting the masses ready for the idea of socialism, not some top down formula for how socialism will come to countries like Japan.

Just because the party may be reformist doesn't make it something the left needs to ignore or not work with.

To make myself more clear, I think that the role of revolutionaries when it comes to reformist mass movements on the order of the JCP, PSUV, Die Linke, etc. should be to stand outside of those movements, trying to reach the workers who move through them by presenting a clear revolutionary viewpoint and alternative, while engaging with the groups themselves in united fronts. I think that joining reformist groups as the IMT (for example) does will only compromise the revolutionaries and do a disservice to the workers they are trying to reach.

[synthesis]

Reformism doesn't make revolution obsolete. If nothing else, the ruling classes tend to grant more concessions to reformists when they perceive a growing threat from revolutionaries.


I'll say nothing against [MLK]. At one time the whites in the United States called him a racialist, and extremist, and a Communist. Then the Black Muslims came along and the whites thanked the Lord for Martin Luther King.

[Spooky]

I think people are missing the point somewhat, you want a communist revolution in Japan? Fine, but I don't think the Americans will be too happy about it, how long do you think it would take for them to invade the place? One week? One month? One year at the very most. Japan is thriving economically but it is still vulnerable. In a country as politically stable as Japan, reformism is the only reasonable solution to the capitalist problem.

Just to restate what I said clearly before, which no one seemed to really care too much about:

Japan ranks as one of the two most egalitarian countries on earth, according to the GINI coefficient, one of the most reliable sources of income and economic equality used in the social sciences. In fact, it is one of the top two most economically egalitarian countries on earth. Their network of social benefits is astounding, and worker's rights and so forth are some of the most exemplary on earth.

As I cannot post links yet, do a google search for "GINI coefficients by country" and click the 1st or 2nd link, then locate Japan on the color coded map.

The Japanese Communist party has been around since WWII. It is nothing new, and it is not revolutionary neither in action or in thought. As I showed on my earlier posts: the JCP is thoroughly and entirely entwined and consumed in the system. My thought was then: any speak of the JCP as being truly representative of advanced socialism, much less a revolutionary party, is thus irrelevant, because we are ascribing our own ideological yearnings (in this threat) onto a party that simply will never fulfill those goals. Why? They are part and parcel in the liberal democratic system. And, I don't mean that in a figurative sense. I mean that they have been fundamentally cemented in the workings of the Japanese state for more than 8 decades now. They bow down to the LDP, which is the conservative, nearly permanent, dominant party of Japanese politics. And the possibility for the JCP to assume power in parliament is absolutely non-existent: the entire electoral process is rigged so that the LDP will always win. If it were to loose power, as it did in the 1990s, it would be absolutely necessary for the JCP to form a ruling coalition with other parties, which would automatically negate any sort of change that the JCP wanted to push for, because the coalition would collapse. And on top of that, it was shown, using the GINI coefficients, that Japan is one of the most highly egalitarian states. They even had life-time employment up until the 1990s. What more "reform" do you want before you have to decide that the whole system itself is the problem?

So, the whole discussion is irrelevant. I do not mean to sound pretentious, but my life's work is in comparative political studies, and as such, I come with a broad background in the political systems throughout the world. And I understand that not everyone might have as an in-depth understanding of Japan, economically or politically speaking. But, we can't go off talking about the JCP and assuming things about it, such as ascribing certain sets of beliefs about the nature of "Communist" parties onto the Japanese political system.

[KC]

To make myself more clear, I think that the role of revolutionaries when it comes to reformist mass movements on the order of the JCP, PSUV, Die Linke, etc. should be to stand outside of those movements, trying to reach the workers who move through them by presenting a clear revolutionary viewpoint and alternative, while engaging with the groups themselves in united fronts. I think that joining reformist groups as the IMT (for example) does will only compromise the revolutionaries and do a disservice to the workers they are trying to reach.I think that the tactic of entryism has been for most cases pretty much determined to be a complete and utter failure, and the only reason it is still used is because these parties have sunk down to complete opportunism whereby the only way they can justify their existence is through latching on to reformist organizations. Of course, entryism is but one manifestation of such opportunism.

[BIG BROTHER]

I think if we can learn anything of the struggle in Venezuela, Ecuador, and Bolivia is that although the line of the JPC is reformist, the fact that the masses are going to them shows that the people are looking for answers, and rising up against capitalism. Thus we could see the masses pushing the JPC further than what their line tells them.

[MilitantWorker]

the JCP is bourgeois

[Spooky]

:lol: I wrote like 3 whole pages worth of critique of the discussion, and then, when I saw your comment, I realized that all I ever had to say was simply that:


the JCP is bourgeois

Now, if people want proof, they can read my earlier posts. But, well said, my friend, well said.

[skki]

These people are very vague in their politics. They call themselves Leninists, but that they dont even advocate revolutionary Socialism, makes this a little hard to swallow. I don't see anything detailing how production would be controlled under their rule. Or what sort of democracy would be implemented. Direct? Liberal?

If Tony Blair and Barack Obama have taught me anything, it's that when politicians are this vague about their politics. they generally have a very good reason for being so.

Also I dont trust Leninists.

[Crux]

I think that the tactic of entryism has been for most cases pretty much determined to be a complete and utter failure, and the only reason it is still used is because these parties have sunk down to complete opportunism whereby the only way they can justify their existence is through latching on to reformist organizations. Of course, entryism is but one manifestation of such opportunism.
Entryism, as such, is not opportunism. Deepending onj the circumstances it might well be a very effective strategy of building the revolutionary löeft, either through a split-off or an overtake. This is what happened in several of teh socialdemocratic youth organisations of the second international, just to mention one of many examples. The current löeadership the JCP is certinly bourguise, but that does not say all about the potential of the JCP, now I am not an expert on japanese conditions, but it's not impossible that building a revolutionary opposition within the JCP is the way to go, especially seeing as JCP seem to have gathered a momentum and new layers are moving into the party. At least so it seems to me, looking at this from the outside.

[cb9's_unity]

The biggest problems with people on these boards is that they attack reformist parties as though they were capitalist parties. The fact is their not, they are progressive and they do stand for the proletariat.

If so many in the left weren't so god damn subborn and sectarian we would support the reformist parties as at very least a way to humanize communism in the mind of the proletariat. Reformist parties have learned a lot from the bourgeois parties and have learned how to gain popularity and grow in numbers.

The problem in the first world countries is that people basically associate communism with evil. If the reformist parties can get people to start calling themselves communists we as the more revolutionary group can start to get people to actually become communists. We should work with the reform parties to grow and radicalize them.

Of course there are people on this board content to reject reformist parties, which only serves to leave them reformist.

[KC]

Entryism, as such, is not opportunism. Deepending onj the circumstances it might well be a very effective strategy of building the revolutionary löeft, either through a split-off or an overtake. This is what happened in several of teh socialdemocratic youth organisations of the second international, just to mention one of many examples. The current löeadership the JCP is certinly bourguise, but that does not say all about the potential of the JCP, now I am not an expert on japanese conditions, but it's not impossible that building a revolutionary opposition within the JCP is the way to go, especially seeing as JCP seem to have gathered a momentum and new layers are moving into the party. At least so it seems to me, looking at this from the outside.

The example that you have brought up is not valid, for the conditions of the time were massively different. I wasn't writing off entryism completely, but merely commenting on how both the CWI and IMT use it (as well as others, obviously, but I'm making a further point by naming these two specifically). I don't think it would be a good idea to derail this topic with another endless discussion on entryism, but I felt that my point should have been clarified.