How do you explain Japan?

[Blanquist]

it was the number 2 economy for a long time yet it hasn't invaded any countries in the last 60 years?

shouldn't japan be a great imperialist power? and shouldn't it have a large military force to assert itself?

[seventeethdecember2016]

It is really just protected by its American allies, which also back up its interests in the region. There was no substantial threat, in the last 60 years, that needed a large military, as the Americans already occupied it and offered it protection.
However, they are currently building up their arsenal, along with kicking some U.S. soldiers, as Okinawa is the example, out of their country.

Besides, Japan hasn't really had any feuds. The worst is a few island disputes with South Korea and China.

[Comrade Trollface]

it was the number 2 economy for a long time yet it hasn't invaded any countries in the last 60 years?

shouldn't japan be a great imperialist power? and shouldn't it have a large military force to assert itself?http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Article_9_of_the_Japanese_Constitution

[electrostal]

Another example might be South Korea, a country still occupied by imperialist military forces which has nevertheless risen to become one of the most advanced economies in the world. All that with a starting position comparatively much worse than Japan's.

It is certainly an interesting issue.

[Ocean Seal]

Another example might be South Korea, a country still occupied by imperialist military forces which has nevertheless risen to become one of the most advanced economies in the world. All that with a starting position comparatively much worse than Japan's.

It is certainly an interesting issue.
South Korea isn't occupied, the USA is its ally, offering to place tens of thousands of troops to its defense, not to ransack it, and its military forces are enormous.

[Comrade Trollface]

Mind you, the US didn't exactly ransack Japan during the US occupation.

[electrostal]

Well most communist parties speak of the US military occupation of ROK.
These US forces are the safest guarantee against the reunification of Korea.

[Comrade Trollface]

Which just goes to show how far removed from reality most Communist parties actually are. Seriously, if your chief gauge for interacting with the world is what most Communist parties think, you're going to walk into traffic one day and die. I don't want that for you:crying:

[electrostal]

Yeah, whatever, the thing is that if the (South) Korean masses were to rise against imperialism and for the unification of the country, they'd have to deal with US military too, in addition to domestic reaction/ROK military.

[islandmilitia]

it was the number 2 economy for a long time yet it hasn't invaded any countries in the last 60 years?

Arguably Japan was able to rise to a position of prominence precisely because it was not placed in the position of having to support a large military - if it had to do so, there would have been less surplus capital available for investment back into the accumulation process, directed towards labour-saving innovations, and as a result Japan would not have been able to acquire a powerful position in export production, and nor would it have been able to achieve success as a non-Communist industrializing state. The reason Japan did not have to endure this burden (burden on investment) is because for the main part of the Cold War it was part of a US-led alliance of anti-Communist states in East Asia, which also included South Korea and Pakistan, amongst others. Under this alliance system, the US undertook the onus of militarily intervening in order to secure sufficient resources and markets for the anti-Communist states, so as to allow those states a space in which to undergo rapid development. In other words, the geopolitical roles normally associated with a country like Japan were displaced to one of the superpowers in the form of the US. For example, the US was at no point really reliant on the resources of countries like Indonesia, but Japan certainly was - so US intervention in Indonesia can, from an economic point of view, be explained in terms of the need to protect the foundations of Japan's development and maintain Japan's junior position in the regional alliance.

Following from these premises, the fact that Japan has more recently come to assume a more active role in East Asia and elsewhere (e.g. its role in certain island disputes) is an indication of the relative weakening of the US-led anti-Communist alliance, because the rationale for this alliance, from the US perspective, has become less relevant.

[Comrade Trollface]

It also helps to remember that Japan had already been a rather industrialized imperial power before the US bombed it into shit. So the expertise to rebuild and advance industrially was there.

[Teacher]

Japan and Europe both have not built up large military arsenals in the postwar era because they leave it to the United States to police the world for capitalism. And in the case of Japan the U.S. made them adopt that anti-military provision as someone pointed out.

That being said nationalism is rising in Japan.

[electrostal]

Japan and Europe both have not built up large military arsenals in the postwar era because they leave it to the United States to police the world for capitalism.
ROK Army is significantly bigger than, for example, Germany's. It's, in fact, the world's 6th biggest army by active personnel size, with great quantities of modern equipment.

[A Revolutionary Tool]

islandmilitia said it perfectly. Basically Japan, Germany, and others didn't have to spend as much on military because the US basically covered their asses. Which meant more could go into other more productive investment.

[Yugo45]

Besides, Japan hasn't really had any feuds. The worst is a few island disputes with South Korea and China.

And Russia/USSR. Appereantly, WW2 between Russia and Japan is still officialy not over.

At least that's what cracked told me:

http://www.cracked.com/article_19867_6-historical-events-happening-more-recently-than-you-think_p2.html

[Permanent Revolutionary]

South Korea isn't occupied, the USA is its ally, offering to place tens of thousands of troops to its defense, not to ransack it, and its military forces are enormous.

Just to clarify, an occupation does not have to be hostile. See for example the British occupation of the Faroes.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Valentine

[Rafiq]

Japan is heavily engaged in the world market and indeed does require Imperialism to sustain itself and it's capital accordingly. Japanese electronics are also manufactured in sweat shops across the globe which would not exist if not for imperialism.

[Workers-Control-Over-Prod]

Japan spends the 9th most money of countries on its military, $70 billion a year, that is more than Germany and one place behind France. Japan also has been giving Billion of dollars to NATO's war effort and been one of the leading "investors", imperialists in Afghanistan.

[A Marxist Historian]

it was the number 2 economy for a long time yet it hasn't invaded any countries in the last 60 years?

shouldn't japan be a great imperialist power? and shouldn't it have a large military force to assert itself?

It is a great imperialist power, Japanese investment is all over Asia, reaping imperial superprofits in the fashion explained by Lenin in his pamphlet on imperialism.

Due to its close alliance/subordination to the USA ever since Hiroshima, its investments are protected by US, not Japanese soldiers. But, the Japanese "self defense force" is nonetheless one of the largest armies in the world.

And it is an open secret that if Japan ever wanted to go nuclear, it could do so in about three weeks.

-M.H.-

[A Marxist Historian]

South Korea isn't occupied, the USA is its ally, offering to place tens of thousands of troops to its defense, not to ransack it, and its military forces are enormous.

A lot of South Koreans disagree about that. US atrocities vs. Koreans, mos certainly including South Koreans, are still bitterly remembered. Especially No Gun Ri, which was worse than My Lai.

Here's an account by, of all places, the BBC.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/worldwars/coldwar/korea_usa_01.shtml

-M.H.-

[A Marxist Historian]

Arguably Japan was able to rise to a position of prominence precisely because it was not placed in the position of having to support a large military - if it had to do so, there would have been less surplus capital available for investment back into the accumulation process, directed towards labour-saving innovations, and as a result Japan would not have been able to acquire a powerful position in export production, and nor would it have been able to achieve success as a non-Communist industrializing state. The reason Japan did not have to endure this burden (burden on investment) is because for the main part of the Cold War it was part of a US-led alliance of anti-Communist states in East Asia, which also included South Korea and Pakistan, amongst others. Under this alliance system, the US undertook the onus of militarily intervening in order to secure sufficient resources and markets for the anti-Communist states, so as to allow those states a space in which to undergo rapid development. In other words, the geopolitical roles normally associated with a country like Japan were displaced to one of the superpowers in the form of the US. For example, the US was at no point really reliant on the resources of countries like Indonesia, but Japan certainly was - so US intervention in Indonesia can, from an economic point of view, be explained in terms of the need to protect the foundations of Japan's development and maintain Japan's junior position in the regional alliance.

Following from these premises, the fact that Japan has more recently come to assume a more active role in East Asia and elsewhere (e.g. its role in certain island disputes) is an indication of the relative weakening of the US-led anti-Communist alliance, because the rationale for this alliance, from the US perspective, has become less relevant.

Also, you had US economic favoritism to Japan and South Korea (and Taiwan too) because of the Cold War and the Chinese Revolution.

Thus, quite uniquely, both Japan and South Korea could export to the USA without any tariff barriers while they themselves had rigid tariff barriers against US exports. This extremely unusual arrangement was the original foundation of Japanese and South Korean economic success. And in the cases of South Korea and Taiwan, you also had outright economic foreign aid in large quantities.

The ruling classes of all three countries were able to take advantage of this situation, unlike some other big US foreign aid recipients (Egypt comes to mind) because the backbone of precapitalist social arrangements had been broken by radical land reform.

In Japan, the MacArthur reforms were originally planned to weaken the Japanese ruling class and throw Japan into social crisis, which is exactly what went on in the first few postwar years, but when US policy to Japan took a U turn after the Chinese Revolution, they became the foundation for rapid Japanese economic growth.

The same thing happened in South Korea and Taiwan, where the old landlords were Japanese compradors whose interests the CIA and the KMT had no interest in protecting.

In South Korea radical land reforms were carried out by Kim Il Sung during the brief North Korean occupation of the South, and the CIA refused to let Syngman Rhee reverse them. In Taiwan Chiang Kai Shek carried them out himself, as the old ruling classes not only were tied to the Japanese, but wanted Taiwan to be independent. So he was delighted to carry out land reform after his bloody suppression of the Taiwan independence revolt of the late 1940s.

-M.H.-

[scarletghoul]

first, like western europe, americas east asian sattelites (s korea, japan and taiwan) were able to develop a lot in order to counter the communist influence which was very strong in the region. second, the ruling classes of these countries are just as much a part of the global imperialist class as american or british capitalists. economically, at least.

[Book O'Dead]

Strange that "Shinjuku Dori", who claims to hail fom Japan has not condescended to take part in this thread.

I wonder why.

[Davide]

Japanies are very intelligent and hardworking. Due to these capabilities they are heading towards more advanced technology.