I'm participating in the ranking.Please click and cheer for me.
Abe's state funeral reminded him of the greatness of the deceased - the breakaway from the post - war regime has truly begun.
People who have remained at the center of conversation
This is the end of the anti-Abe faction
Escape from the post-war regime
Former Prime Minister Abe's state funeral was held on the 27th. Looking back on this issue now, I was convinced today that this was also former Prime Minister Abe. At the same time, I felt sad, wondering if I was really saying goodbye to former Prime Minister Abe.
After Mr. Abe was shot, there was an uproar over whether or not to hold a state funeral, but the tone of the crazy people who opposed a state funeral was exactly the same as the one that was being waged during Mr. Abe's time as prime minister. Ta. Ironically, it may be thanks to the ridiculous anti-Abe people that even after Mr. Abe's murder, we still had the opportunity to support former Prime Minister Abe until today. However, what were their achievements?
Personally, if I think about former Prime Minister Abe's most important accomplishment, it is that he brought all of the Japanese people to the entrance or exit of the task of breaking away from the post-war regime.
He was probably the first Japanese prime minister to firmly declare that the Japan-Korea issue is over. What was the meaning of the joint visits to Pearl Harbor and Hiroshima with Mr. Obama? What prompted the reorganization and proposed the Quad framework for the purpose of the U.S. Seventh Fleet's existence is already a shift to a new Asia-Pacific regime. What does UN reform mean? The United Nations is the postwar regime itself. He even took on the challenge of making that change.
What the Japanese people have regained is their pride as Japanese people rather than the economy. That's thanks to Shinzo Abe.
South Korean say Japan is a democratic backward country without direct election of leader.Don't you know the parliamentary cabinet system?
Some Koreans say that Japan, which does not elect a leader in direct elections, is a backward democratic country.Japan has a parliamentary cabinet system.The choice of leaders is similar to that of Britain.Britain's ruling party leader is a candidate for prime minister and is elected prime minister by a majority of the House of Representatives.
UK adopts the same parliamentary cabinet system as Japan.The prime minister, not the president, is elected from Parliament.
Some Japanese misunderstand this, but it is only an internal election to select a leader when the LDP presidential election is held.If elected here, he will be elected prime minister with a majority vote in the Diet.The disclosure of the party's election is only due to the high demand.There is no obligation to disclose it.It is unclear how the leaders of the Constitutional Democratic Party or the Communist Party of Japan became leaders.
Considering how Moon Jae In was elected party leader in Korea, the same can be said.Democrats, who saw Sanders' superiority in the 2020 U.S. presidential election as a failure to beat Trump, persuaded two other candidates to withdraw their candidates and unify them with Biden.It's not about factionalism, but it's about doing the same thing .The Republican Party unifies Trump, but the cause is unclear.In any case, this is just a matter for parties to decide.
This has nothing to do with direct elections, whether they are democratic or not.Both the presidential system and the parliamentary cabinet system are forms of democracy.The essential point is the difference about votes.Lawmakers are elected from one district and the prime minister is one of them.The president is elected by the vote of the whole people.In other words, the content of the vote is different.Based on this, the president has the power to make decisions without the approval of Congress, which is different from lawmakers.On the other hand, we can think of the need for a referendum to give the president privileged power.
To concentrate one's power is to give one certain dictatorship.Whether this is necessary or not is a choice in the form of national democracy.In countries where war and civil war are expected, radical power is often entrusted to the leader.
The presidential system is given great authority for direct elections.The parliamentary cabinet system is selected by parliamentary approval, so the authority is limited.
Japan is the only country of color to successfully modernize (industrial revolution).
Japan is said to be the only country among people of color that succeeded in modernizing through the industrial revolution. So why was only Japan able to succeed?
Japan has been isolated from the rest of the world for over 200 years, and we are generally taught in school that modernization began with the opening of the country. What exactly is the industrial revolution? The industrial revolution can be thought of as a power revolution.
Watt in England improves the steam period and creates a machine that converts the power of steam into rotary motion. This was a revolutionary invention at the time. He will be able to transmit rotational motion to various gears and realize complex movements in various locations. So, what was the machine like up until then? It was similar to how humans and cows rotate their shafts, or when they step on a loom with their feet to obtain rotational motion.
This is the power of steam, and if you keep the fire burning, you can get an output many times greater than human power. What this achieves is mass production of products.
Until then, it was called a cottage craft industry, and as the name suggests, people made things by hand, but from now on, we will enter an era in which machines will be making large quantities of the same items.
This is the industrial revolution. Products manufactured in large quantities are cheaper and become popular among various classes. Steam locomotives also provided the infrastructure for transporting these large amounts of goods. From this era, the demand for coal to generate overwhelming thermal power increased explosively.
So, why did Japan succeed in the industrial revolution? Japan already had the technology to make these machines by watching and copying. During the Edo period, techniques were honed and improved as a traditional craft during the apprenticeship system, and the sword culture continued for a long time, making iron processing technology one of the best in the world. has in the metal processing field. Unlike human power, steam engines produce overwhelming power, so wooden machines would easily break. In other words, even the smallest parts of various machines must be made of metal and assembled. When Japanese people saw Western industrial machinery, they may have simply thought, ``Oh, I think I could make something like this.''
One reason is that Japanese people are good with their hands, but clocks were the most precise gear-based machines of the time. It is said that Japanese clocks were already created in Japan during the era of Tokugawa Ieyasu. Currently, Japanese clocks have a reputation for being the most accurate and unbreakable in the world, but these technologies were not invented yesterday.
■English subtitles
There is another thing that Japan achieved that was necessary for the industrial revolution. It is a departure from the feudal system. In the West, a civil revolution had already taken place, and the industrial revolution began more than 100 years later. Free citizens were already active during the Industrial Revolution, and their lives were not tied to feudal lords or land as in the feudal system.
In other words, when wealthy people at the time started a company that mass-produced products using industrial machinery, they could recruit and hire employees.
This is the proletariat, and a mobile labor force is essential to the industrial revolution. The Meiji Restoration was truly a revolution that destroyed the feudal Edo shogunate system and created a civil society.
The Japanese at the time were able to accomplish something that had never been seen before in the world: they simultaneously carried out an industrial revolution. Then, if you think about why other countries of colored people were unable to modernize, it can be said that it is because these two points were not met. One is metal processing technology. The other is the formation of a civil society, which means breaking away from feudal society.
In the first place, Southeast Asian countries and other countries of color were all colonized by the West from the latter half of the 15th century, so it is difficult to imagine that the countries under colonial rule would be able to achieve the industrial revolution that first occurred in the West in the late 18th century. It's impossible to say so. For example, what if we look at the neighboring countries of China and the Korean Peninsula?
China also has a sword culture, and has a long history of using iron tools. However, they were unable to break away from feudalism. As for the Korean peninsula, Korea did not have the technology to make needles and wheels, so they imported them from China. What this means is that the needle meant that people didn't have fine metalworking skills, and the wheel meant that people didn't know how to bend wood into rings, so they didn't know how to move things. It was carried on the back of a person, carried by a person, or placed on their head. In other words, it is impossible to improve the efficiency of infrastructure, and in the first place it is impossible to make the gears in industrial machinery or perform detailed metal processing.
What was fatal on the Korean peninsula was that the class system was exactly as it was before the Middle Ages, and it was a distorted society with 40% slaves, so talk of a mobile labor force was a thing of the future. . In order to firmly protect this old Korean society, the aristocratic class, the yangban, completely eliminated various reforms for modernization. It can be said that both were fatally lacking.
Only 27 years after the Meiji Restoration, Japan defeated the Qing Dynasty, which was considered a major power, and 10 years later defeated Russia. After World War I, Japan sat at the table at the center of the world as a permanent member of the League of Nations in 1919. This was only 51 years after the Meiji Restoration. In this way, Japan was the only people of color to achieve modernization, and the idea was to spread this wave to Asia.
Sun Yat-sen's Xinhai Revolution was made possible with Japan's support, and Sun Yat-sen, who founded the Republic of China, believed that Japan's Meiji Restoration was the cause of the Chinese Revolution, and that the Chinese Revolution was actually the result of the Restoration. I'm making a statement. During his exile in Japan, Sun Yat-sen took the name Sun Yat-sen and was a person who learned about Japan's modernization. There was a man named Kim Ok-gyun on the Korean peninsula, but the revolution in Korea ended in failure, and Kim defected to Japan. However, when he went to Shanghai, he was assassinated by an assassin sent from Korea. It is ironic that just four months after Kim Ok-gyun's death, the Sino-Japanese War began, resulting in the independence of the Korean peninsula and the beginning of reforms toward modernization.
As a result, China started the Xinhai Revolution in 1912, 44 years after the Meiji Restoration, and the annexation of Japan and Korea began 42 years after the 1910 Meiji Restoration. In fact, as Asian countries eventually achieved independence after the war, the process of modernization was necessary in any case, but it is worth noting that Japan was the only country of color to achieve this. However, it is clear that the modernization of Asia was derived from Japan's Meiji Restoration, and in this regard, China, the Korean Peninsula, and Japan, without exception, have recognized this important process within the theme of mod
Untimely protests against state funerals - Media incitement that is getting worse - The media is not representative of the people.
The size of the opposition that makes you laugh
What is the argument that divided the nation into two?
What is the content of the poll?
I don't understand the difference from sports newspapers
Mass media turning into sports newspaper due to slump in sales
The process of dividing national opinion into two
The media does not represent the people
Report only the facts, not opinions
On the day of the demonstration by opponents of former Prime Minister Abe's state funeral, it is said that there were around 100 to 200 people, based on a partial count. Police said there were 500 people. It is said that 4,183 people attended the state funeral, and approximately 23,000 people donated flowers (as announced on the 27th).
What exactly was the debate that reportedly divided the nation into two? Kudanshita, where the state funeral was held, is close to Meiji University's Surugadai campus. The university has traditionally had a strong left-wing student movement. Of course, ordinary students have nothing to do with it, but even if left-wing activists in Tokyo gathered together, it gives the impression that there were too few of them.
What is the content of public opinion polls conducted by the media? The problem is the questions. Depending on how the question is asked, it is possible to lead the data to the result intended by the questioner. I would like all public opinion poll data to be disclosed.
It seems like all mass media are now doing what sports newspapers and other media were doing before the decline of major mass media due to the spread of SNS.
In order to sell articles with headlines, sports newspapers publish speculative information in the headlines that have not been fact-checked, and sell them at station kiosks even though they say that the information is unconfirmed by adding a question mark at the end. It will be done. The "?" part is hidden from view due to the way it is displayed.
Many people were surprised and tolerated it, saying, ``It can't be helped because it's a sports newspaper,'' but no one believed it and it was just a form of entertainment. That's what all the media are doing now.
The underlying issue is sales. Sports newspapers used to take desperate measures to increase circulation, but I wonder if many media outlets now think of this as the right way to go. What is more troubling than sports newspapers is that the major media barely have the power to stir up public opinion.
Using the current issue of state funerals as an example, when the opposition party first objects to a state funeral, the media immediately jumps in and reports on it. At this stage, the ruling party and the opposition party are in conflict, so in that sense they are theoretically divided into two parties. However, this does not mean that national opinion is divided into two.
Then, the media outlets loudly convey the opinions of the opposition parties, and the process of dividing national opinion into two begins. It is incitement. First of all, there is a process in which the media themselves agitate and increase the number of opposition parties, and then they cultivate them as if it were a big problem divided into two.
They increase sales by raising the grade of articles based on irrelevant opinions and information by several levels. The more confrontational the structure, the more sensational it is. This is a common method that the media has used in the past on various issues.
The media sometimes uses expressions such as ``representing the people,'' but it feels very strange and even unpleasant. They are just office workers, not representatives of the people. When did they receive the mandate of the people? When did he run for election and when was he elected to the Diet?
If you're an average office worker, you might go to a yakitori restaurant for a drink with your colleagues on the way home from work and talk about politics. The media are just office workers, so that should be fine. You should not express your opinion to the people as if you were a representative of the people. We need to stop privatizing public airwaves and simply collect and report the facts.
