Log in

View Full Version : Communism Is Alive and Well and Living in Japan



Unicorn
4th July 2008, 06:32
For those who say that communism is dead...



Cute as Hello Kitty, 19-year-old Michiko Suzuki looks like any of the thousands of teens haunting the street fashion stores of Tokyo's youthful Harajuku district. But when the Wako University student takes time off from study sessions dissecting Marx to hit the street, it's usually in order to distribute political literature. To her classmates, the party may be something to which you bring the karaoke machine, but Suzuki knows it's really the revolutionary vanguard of class struggle. That's because Suzuki is a teenage communist.

Bolshevism runs in her family: The daughter and granddaughter of party members, she joined the Japanese Communist Party (JCP) as soon as she turned 18. "I think it's cool to see [fellow members] struggling unyieldingly," says Suzuki, smiling shyly. "I really love that last word."

The idea of a communist party soldiering on in the world's second-largest economy more than 15 years after the collapse of the Soviet Union may invite comparisons to Japanese soldiers who remained hidden on isolated Pacific islands because nobody told them World War II had ended. But the JCP is far from extinct: It claims some 400,000 members, and earned 7.3% of the vote in the most recent legislative elections, in 2005 — that's 4.36 million voters.

"The JCP is probably the most successful non-ruling communist party in Asia, if not the world," says Lam Peng-er, a research fellow at the National University of Singapore's East Asian Institute.

That success has its roots in the party's long history in Japan. Born in 1922 as the Japanese branch of the Communist International, the international federation of Marxist-Leninist parties created by Moscow, the JCP quickly adapted itself to local conditions. It was one of the few Japanese groups to stand up to the rise of Japanese militarists in the run-up to World War II, and suffered heavily as a result.

"The JCP was the only political party that struggled against the past war of aggression with the sacrifice of members' lives," says Kazuo Shii, the JCP's salaryman-suited chairman. That principled stance earned the respect of many Japanese after the war ended, and the newly legal JCP was allowed to run for election. But the JCP's early success spooked American occupation officials fearful of Soviet infiltration, and they moved to curtail the party's influence. In the "Red Purge" of 1949, they removed all communists and other left-wingers from official positions in Japan, leaving the LDP to dominate for decades. Still, the JCP formed a reliable leftist opposition bloc with the larger and more mainstream Japanese Socialist Party, steadfastly pacifist and opposed to a security alliance with the U.S.

Of course, communist parties elsewhere in the industrialized world that had followed a similar script nonetheless faded into irrelevance in the 1990s. But the JCP, although weaker than in its heyday, still matters in Japanese politics.

Shii credits the JCP's consistent independence from Moscow for its survival. But the JCP's endurance has more to do with its role in the domestic political arena. The largest parties in Japanese politics lack a clear and cohesive identity, functioning more as loose alliances of interest with few discernible political differences, and they draw support less on ideological bases than through personal networks of patronage built by individual candidates. "It's like Tammany Hall," says Lam. Support for the parties themselves is weak, and getting weaker, as increasingly sophisticated Japanese voters seek meaningful political choice.

The JCP may benefit by virtue of actually standing for something — "the socialist/communist society," according to its manifesto. "The JCP is a boutique party, but it's the only political party in Japan that has a strong grassroots organization," says Lam. "In a way, the communists are probably the most modern political party in Japan."

Despite holding only 18 of the 722 seats in the Diet, the JCP often functions as the only genuine opposition to politics-as-usual in Tokyo. Virtually alone among Japan's parties, the communists have hammered Prime Minister Shinzo Abe and others for backsliding on Japan's role in forcing tens of thousands of Asian women into prostitution during World War II. Communist politicians have repeatedly uncovered damaging financial scandals in government — they're too far removed from power to be enmeshed in Tokyo's endemic corruption. "We are the watchdog, but we go further than that," says Shii. "I think the advance of the JCP will be key to the advance of Japanese politics."

Well, maybe — it may be the most progressive party in Japanese politics, but it still adheres to Marxism. (When I half-seriously ask one college-aged party member whether he reads the classics, he reaches into his backpack and produces Volume 2 of the 13-volume Japanese translation of Das Kapital.) And the JCP's cohesion comes at the expense of flexibility and openness — Leninist discipline still applies, and when the Central Committee has ruled on an issue, members are expected to obey. "That's increasingly out of sync with postmodern Japan," says Lam. "But the fear of the JCP is that if they relent, the party will lose its cohesiveness."

The JCP's performance won't change the outcome of July's legislative elections, which could decide the fate of Abe. The Prime Minister's popularity has dropped to record lows in recent weeks due to public anger over mismanaged pension accounts, and he may be forced to resign if the ruling LDP loses too many seats. Still, most Japanese voters will choose either the LDP or the opposition Democratic Party, however unenthusiastically. But the JCP will pick up protest votes, and maybe more, if young Japanese follow Suzuki's example. "I think my friends and those around me have a lot of difficulty and hardship finding themselves, having any confidence in themselves," says Suzuki. "But as a member of the JCP, I have a wider perspective on my future. I know we have possibility." Who said the war was over?

http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1636115,00.html?iid=sphere-inline-bottom

534634634265
5th July 2008, 07:39
i was really happy to read that article.
if only the communist party in the US had so much going on.
when i hear a description of any cohesive organization, the communists have rarely sprung to mind. so good to see a cadre of people from my generation fighting the good fight.

Schrödinger's Cat
5th July 2008, 16:46
The Japanese Communist Party is something I'm very proud of defending, both from its historic significance (Japanese militarism was, in my opinion, more destructive than German Nazism) and current activities. The JCP recently resurged to 7.5% in 2007.

Die Neue Zeit
5th July 2008, 18:58
But the JCP is far from extinct: It claims some 400,000 members, and earned 7.3% of the vote in the most recent legislative elections, in 2005 — that's 4.36 million voters.

Now I wonder why American revolutionary leftists can't get their act together. Even by MY standards, this is a mass party. :rolleyes:

Lost In Translation
5th July 2008, 19:27
Now I wonder why American revolutionary leftists can't get their act together. Even by MY standards, this is a mass party. :rolleyes:

Or even Canada, which has a fraction of America's population, and still can't manage a fraction of a percent (never mind a seat in the House of Commons) in any election :blink:

Die Neue Zeit
5th July 2008, 19:31
^^^ Never mind elections, which should be treated with contempt by disillusioned "workers" an "the middle class":

http://www.revleft.com/vb/why-abstention-and-t77658/index.html

Bud Struggle
5th July 2008, 19:36
Now I wonder why American revolutionary leftists can't get their act together. Even by MY standards, this is a mass party. :rolleyes:

America really doesn't have much in the way of fringe parties--mostly because of the two party system--there is very little in the US beyone the Democrats and the Republicans. Even when a third party starts up it is usually focused on one issue or even more likely one candidate.

I don't know if it's generally a good or a bad thing--there is indeed no real viable Communist Party in the United States, but there is no real viable Fascist Party here like there is in England--let's say.

Anerican's I guess are pretty content with the system they have--or they'd change it.

534634634265
6th July 2008, 03:28
Anerican's I guess are pretty content with the system they have--or they'd change it.
i think they just aren't aware of they power they possess to bring about such change.
unfortunately for us, the image of the ignorant American is supported by the millions of ignorant Americans who travel the world much like mentally-crippled plague rats.

Kwisatz Haderach
6th July 2008, 13:36
I don't know if it's generally a good or a bad thing--there is indeed no real viable Communist Party in the United States, but there is no real viable Fascist Party here like there is in England--let's say.
True, but notice that there are many Republican politicians who could rightfully be called fascists, while there are no Democrat politicians who could even remotely be called communists (Swedish-style social democracy is about as far left as the most extreme Democrats go).


Anerican's I guess are pretty content with the system they have--or they'd change it.
It's not as simple as that. It's a matter of the difference between how content you are and how difficult it is to change the system. If it's real easy to change, you might go change it even if you're just a little bit upset. If it's really inflexible, you will only try to change it if you're utterly fed up.

вор в законе
6th July 2008, 14:35
America is a two-party state.

RedAnarchist
6th July 2008, 14:37
America is a two-party state.

And even then, those two parties are not that different.

534634634265
6th July 2008, 14:48
to my understanding, wouldn't both the democrats and the republicans be considered "the labor party" in england?

RedAnarchist
6th July 2008, 14:53
to my understanding, wouldn't both the democrats and the republicans be considered "the labor party" in england?

Labour used to be centre-left (they were never as socialist as some people like to think), but are now more centrist, occupying a similar position to the Democrats, although all British governments just cosy up to any American government regardless of which party is in power. The Tories tended to be more like the Republicans, but they are now more like right-wing Democrats.

Led Zeppelin
6th July 2008, 15:01
The Japanese Communist Party is something I'm very proud of defending, both from its historic significance (Japanese militarism was, in my opinion, more destructive than German Nazism) and current activities. The JCP recently resurged to 7.5% in 2007.

Why are you proud of defending a party which isn't revolutionary or socialist to begin with?

Defending the JCP would be the same as defending the Socialist Party in the Netherlands because their programmes are pretty much the same.


A change Japanese society needs at present is a democratic revolution instead of a socialist revolution. It is a revolution that puts an end to Japan's extraordinary subordination to the United States and the tyrannical rule of large corporations and business circles, a revolution that secures Japan's genuine independence and carries out democratic reforms in politics, the economy, and society.

Although these are democratic reforms realizable within the framework of capitalism, their full-fledged achievement can be made possible through a transfer of state power to the forces that represent the fundamental interests of the Japanese people from those representing Japan's monopoly capitalism and subordinate to the United States. Success in achieving this democratic change will help solve problems that cause the people to suffer and pave the way for building an independent, democratic, and peaceful Japan that safeguards the fundamental interests of the majority of the people.
Link (http://www.jcp.or.jp/english/23rd_congress/program.html#05)

What do they mean by a "Democratic Revolution" instead of a socialist revolution?

It is explained further on:



1. Defend all the provisions of the Constitution, including the preamble, and in particular strive to have provisions of peace and democracy fully implemented.

2. Maintain the system of parliamentary democracy in which the Diet is the supreme state organ in both name and deed, the multi-party system that guarantees the existence of opposition parties, and the system of political power change that allows a political party or a group of political parties in the parliamentary majority to be in charge of government.
Link (http://www.jcp.or.jp/english/23rd_congress/program.html#05)

How would this "new Japan" look like in practice?

It is explained further on:



4. A new Japan will develop peace diplomacy in line with the following basic points:

-- Control irresponsible activities of multinational corporations, protect the global environment, check economic hegemony by great powers, and seek to establish a democratic international economic order based on respect for economic sovereignty for every nation with fair and equitable relations.

-- Exert efforts to establish peaceful coexistence among countries with different social systems and establish dialogue as well as relations of coexistence among various civilizations with different values.
Link (http://www.jcp.or.jp/english/23rd_congress/program.html#05)

In other words, the capitalist state-machinery will not be destroyed, the JCP believes that it is not necessary to do so, we already have parliamentary democracy right?

All they need is to win an election and become the majority, then they'll implement their socialism, and the road to communism can begin.

How will this road to communism look like in practice? Well, peaceful co-existence of course! They'll also make sure to "control the irresponsible activities of multi-national corporations", so no need to worry about that either.

Only a reformist can support such a party.

534634634265
6th July 2008, 15:13
Labour used to be centre-left (they were never as socialist as some people like to think), but are now more centrist, occupying a similar position to the Democrats, although all British governments just cosy up to any American government regardless of which party is in power. The Tories tended to be more like the Republicans, but they are now more like right-wing Democrats.
so where would you see an america run by Obama?
"just another gear in the capitalist machine" rubbish aside, i feel that Obama could be a good chance to see SOME change here in the states.

Killfacer
6th July 2008, 16:29
Both American parties would be pretty right wing here in England. I saw some bloke from America on question time (for you yanks thats like a poltical debate thing where they have politicians and political commentators on the mighty BBC), and he said even the democrats would appear fairly right wing over here. Of course the main difference is in England the prime minister is allowed to be an athiest/whatever he wants.

534634634265
6th July 2008, 18:35
well, theres no requirement for our leader to be religious,
its only due to the influence of religious groups over the masses of voters that our leaders appeal to these evil organizations.